CAPALPHA TRADE PVT. LTD. Vs. USHIK GALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Applicant, a Corporate entity, on whose behalf Vinay Kumar Agarwal had lodged First Information Report (FIR) leading to registration of C.R. No.50 of 2022 with Worli Police Station, Mumbai (subsequently transferred to EOW and registered as EOW CR No.8 of 2022) for the offences punishable under Ss. 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 has preferred this application seeking cancellation of bail granted to Respondent No.1 by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 47th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai by an order dtd. 14/3/2022, primarily on the ground that, the Respondent No.1 has committed breach of the undertaking on the basis of which he was released on bail.

(2.) The background facts necessary for the determination of this application can be stated in brief as under:- Capalpha Trade Pvt. Ltd.-first informant's company deals in the business, inter-alia, of trade finance. Capsave is a sister concern of the Applicant herein. Dentsu Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (Dentsu) made a representation to the first informant to initially provide invoice finance and, later on, the first informant company was induced to provide trade finance to Dentsu. Sahil Arora (A2), Robin Gupta (A3), Haresh Nayak (A4), Sarthak Behel (A5), Shubham Tiwari (A6) representing Dentsu; Ushik Gala (A8)-respondent No.1, Ishita Gala (A9), Sumit Singh (A10) and Dhwani Dattani (A11), who represented Suumaya Industries Ltd., and Suumaya Agro Ltd. and Pruthvi Shah and Jignesh Shah, the partners of Veda Multicorp LLP allegedly induced the first informant company to provide trade finance in connection with a program purportedly under CSR, 'Need To Feed' by making false representation that the first informant company would generate lucrative returns.

(3.) First informant was induced to part with the sum of Rs.117,73,12,1289.00 by tendering false and fabricated mercantile documents like bills, invoices, lorry receipts evidencing the sale and delivery of the goods, when, in fact, there was no procurement and sale of the goods. The amount so fraudulently obtained from the first informant company was siphoned off. Under the terms of the contract, the accused had agreed to pay interest at the rate of 2% per month on the outstanding amount. Thus, a sum of Rs.19,31,93,260.00 was due towards interest. Having realized that it was deceived to provide trade finance without any trade on the basis of false and fabricated documents and false representations, first informant lodged the report.