SURINDER KAIRAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common order these two petitions; one filed by Surinder Kairam (Crl.M(M)No.2021/02) for grant of regular bail and the. other petition filed by Tarun Kairam (Crl.M(M)No.2053/02) whereby he has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail will be disposed of as both of them are filed in the same case. Surinder Kairam is the father and Tarun Kairam is his son.

(2.) The case was registered on the complaint of Satish Kumar Sharma. The allegation against these two petitioners and their co-accused is that in execution of a criminal conspiracy hatched by the petitioner surinder Kairam and other members of his family, including the son Tarun Kairam, they have cheated the complainant of more than Rs.1.5 crores. Prosecution case is that in the year 2000-2001 the accused fraudulently and dishonestly pursuaded the complainant to become a partner through his company M/s A.S.& Sons(P)Ltd, in a partnership firm M/s Saat Sur Enterprises on the pretended object of carrying out firm/TV serial business. On misrepresentation and false assurance the petitioner Surinder Kairam, who is the brain behind this conspiracy, in complicity with other accused collected the said amount by demand draft showing the same to have been paid to M/s Atexavision (India) which was a Chennai based firm of an NRI Subbarao who was supplying TV serial named Gold Medal Champion, Soccer Legend, Golf club etc. to M/s Saat Sur Enterprises, All the papers, agreement, receipt and payments were purportedly signed by V.Natrajan, who was said to be authorised signatory of M/S Atexavision (India) but entire' documentation and execution of the receipt of payment were handled by co-accused K.C.N.Mohan at his residence-cum-office in Bangalore in his capacity as branch office representative of M/s Atexavision (India). The complainant and petitioner Surinder Kairam made several visit in October, 2000 to Bangalore, exchanged communications and messages, talked on telephone at Bangalore. It was agreed that 26 episodes of TV serial Golf Club would be sold by M/s Atexavision (India) to M/s Saat Sur Enterprises for a total sum of Rs.2.85 crores. One Sunil Joshi, a co-accused, was introduced as the prospective buyer of the said programme for a sum of Rs.4.11 crores on behalf of M/s Channel G Entertainment, a Calcutta based subsidiary firm of a known film maker M/s Adhikari Brothers. Signing amount, of Rs.11.00 lacs through demand draft was also surreptitiously tendered by Sunil Joshi at the behest of the petitioner Surinder Kairam which was got credited in favour of M/s Atexavision (India), Half of this amount was taken back from the complainant by making misrepresentation. During investigations it was revealed that M/s Atexavision (India) and M/s Channel G Entertainment both were proprietary firm of the petitioner, Tarun Kairam which had bank account at Standard Chartered Bank, New Delhi. It was further revealed that Subbarao and V. Natrajan were non-existent persons and there was no office of M/s Atexavision in Chennai nor was M/s channel G Entertainment a subsidiary of Adhikari Brothers nor did it have any office in Calcutta. Sunil Joshi was also not an authorised representative of Adhikari Brothers to negotiate for the purchase of the programme. The investigation also revealed that the programme Golf Club was imported by the petitioner, Tarun Kairam from M/s Sandra Carter, New York in the name of his another firm RB&Co. for a paltry sum of Rs. 1.75 lacs some time in December, 2000, i.e, a few months after the accused had entered into the conspiracy to cheat the complainant for more than Rs.1.00 crores. During the investigation it was also found that the petitioner and his family and their firms have also opened as many as 30 bank accounts for defrauding the complainant and that the money was rotated from M/s Atexavision (India) to other accounts for either to prepare demand drafts of the share of the petitioner Surinder Kairam for a contribution in terms of the partnership deed of M/s Saat Sur Entertainment or to siphon off for personal use.

(3.) Counsel for Surinder Kairam has argued that his client was an old man and that he had entered into a partnership business with the complainant and that a dispute has arisen between them which has led to his filing of a suit by this petitioner for dissolution of the partnership and rendition of accounts etc. It is submitted that the averment of the complainant and the investigation disclosed the dispute of a civil nature and not commission of an offence. He further submitted that various properties of this petitioner which are sufficient to secure the interest of the complainant have already been attached. According to him the petitioner is a sick man and he was granted interim bail which has been extended by the court and for this reason also the bail should be granted to the petitioner. He also contended that the charge-sheet has already been filed. His son Tarun Kairam had also joined the investigation. The petitioner also had a heart surgery. His wife and the daughter have been enlarged on bail. For all these reasons he has prayed for grant of bail to this petitioner.