Delay in filing complaint gets accused bizmen pre-arrest bail

Two businessmen accused of cheating and dealing with stolen properties in Mumbai were granted anticipatory bail after police delayed registering the case against them for eight months. The complainant alleged that the accused had purchased a gold bar worth ?1.29 crore from him on credit, but failed to pay after returning a fake bar. The court granted bail after the accused produced all relevant documents and the prosecution could not point out any suspicious entry in the evidence.

Mumbai: Two businessmen booked for a cheating case were granted anticipatory bail on Wednesday as the police accepted a written complaint from the complainant but did not register the case against the accused for eight months.

HT Image

It was claimed that the accused Jayant Solanki, Nishant Gupta, and the complainant dealt in gold. According to the complainant, Solanki and Gupta had purchased a gold bar weighing 2,500 grams worth ₹1.29 crore from him on credit in July 2022.

However, the complainant claimed that they failed to pay, so he asked them to return the gold bar. On August 16, 2022, the accused returned the gold bar. The complainant alleged that the next day when the bar was checked it turned out to be fake.

Besides, it was alleged that the accused had been dealing with stolen properties and had received stolen gold.

The defence lawyer Vipul Jain contended that the two have appeared before the officer and have submitted all the relevant documents and given their explanation to police. He contended that no case was made out against the accused.

The complainant approached the police and the case was finally registered on March 8, 2023. The court said delay in registering the case is not explained.

“According to the investigation officer, they were making inquiries before registration of the offence. However, it is settled that when the cognizable offence is disclosed the police ought to have registered the first information and proceeded with investigation as early as possible. However, in the present case if the investigation officer has wasted eight months’ time only for deciding whether to register FIR or not, it is definitely a doubtful act on the part of the investigation officer,” the court said while granting anticipatory bail to the two businessmen.

The court further said that the accused produced all the documents relating to the case and cooperated with the investigation. The court also added the prosecution could not point out any suspicious entry in the documents and evidence produced by the two businessmen.

On the allegations that the accused had dealt with stolen properties, the court said, the accused are gold dealers and thus have the capacity to purchase and sell gold. The court said a prima facie case is not made against the accused.