No transit pre-arrest bail to IAS officer booked for duping several people

IAS officer Ashutosh Kumar Sahay's transit anticipatory bail plea was rejected by Dindoshi sessions court in Mumbai for defrauding people of crores in investment schemes.

MUMBAI: The Dindoshi sessions court recently rejected the transit anticipatory bail plea of IAS officer Ashutosh Kumar Sahay, booked for allegedly defrauding several people of crores of rupees on the pretext of doubling their investment within a year in slum rehabilitation schemes and other construction projects across the city.

HT Image

“Prima facie case against the applicant is established and said sole ground is sufficient to reject the application. It is seen that the allegation of commission of offence is not in his official capacity. Therefore, merely because the applicant is a high-ranking officer, it is not a relevant consideration to decide the present application,” said additional sessions judge Shrikant Y Bhosale while rejecting the pre-arrest bail plea.

In July 2023, the Versova police booked Sahay and three others for allegedly scamming several investors of nearly ₹5.5 crore in the name of investing in several SRA/MHADA schemes and construction projects across the city.

According to the police complaints, Sahay has since 2017 used his power and position to induce them to invest a large sum of money, promising a high return within a year. Later, when the amounts were not returned as promised, suspicion arose among the investors. Inquiries revealed that Sahay had deceived them; the documents shown to induce them to part with the amounts were forged and fabricated, leading to the registration of the FIR.

During the hearing of his pre-arrest bail, Sahay’s counsel advocate, Ashok Bhatia, submitted that Transit Anticipatory Bail can be granted by Sessions Court or by the Hon’ble High Court, though the first information was registered beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the court.

However, the court, while upholding the maintainability of the transit anticipatory bail, refuted the argument on the grounds that almost fifteen days were consumed in concluding the proceeding, which was sufficient time for the applicant to approach the court in whose jurisdiction the crime was registered.

“It is also seen that for filing the anticipatory bail application, the presence of the applicant is not necessary. So also, now the facility of e-filing is available. Considering all the above aspects, the court is of the view that the application is devoid of merit,” the court noted.

The advocate for the intervenor informed the court that several other cases were pending against the applicant. Six other crimes have been registered against Sahay and two crimes each against his wife Monica Sahay, and accomplice Sanjay Pandey.