SHAHRUKH KHAN Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these four petitions are the first bail applications of petitioners, namely, Shahrukh Khan, Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Aman Manchanda and Mandar Kulkarni under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with Crime No. 637/2019 under Sections 420, 406, 417, 468, 474 of IPC, 66(C), 66(D), I.T. Act and 6(1) of Nikshepako Ke Hito Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2000 registered at Police Station Vijay Nagar, District-Indore.

(2.) The case is registered on the basis of written complaint filed by one Rajendra Singh alleging that the owner and employees of the "Trade India Research Company" instigated him to open an account with the company and trade in shares. The company will provide him expert advice. With the advice of the company, he can earn huge profit by trading in shares. Several employees of the company called him again and again with fake names and instigated him to invest the money. Relying on their statements, he opened account No. 6138001300005452 with the Punjab National Bank and deposited Rs.23,66,000/- in parts. The company fraudulently obtained details of his income, investment capacity, risk bearing capacity, loan etc. and particulars of his Aadhar Card, PAN Card, KYC and net banking password etc. by deceiving him assuring that the money will always remain under his control, but by misusing all this information and also by fabricating his signature, his money got transferred in the account No. 4622002100005152 of the Company with the Punjab National Bank. Whenever he inquired, the company assured him that his money will be doubled soon. Later, the company further obtained documents of his wife also and opened a Demat account in her name by using ID and password of his own account without their permission, while his wife had never supplied any information or had signed any document for the purpose. They prepared fake profile of his wife and by using forged document obtained Aadhar Card and PAN Card of his wife also. After some time, when he got no profit rather incurred losses and wished to close the account but owner of the company refused to meet him or to redress his grievance. Several employees of the company assured him on one count or the other, sometimes they allured and sometimes threatened him not to take action and to deposit more money in the account. After all efforts, when he did not get his money back, he approached the police and lodged the report apprehending that his documents may be further misused by the company. The police registered the case, which is under investigation.

(3.) Learned Counsel for all the petitioners have submitted that they are only salaried employees of the company. They are well qualified. The company, which is a SEBI registered company and has all legal permissions and valid licence issued by SEBI to work as investment adviser, published an advertisement. In response of the advertisement, they appeared in interview and got selected after clearing the same. They were working on the instructions of the Directors of the Company for promoting the business. They were only advisers and providing expert advice to their customers to invest money in shares. They were simply working for salary. They have never operated account of the complainant and have never instigated him to open account with the company. In exercise of promotion of business of the company, some of the employees had called the complainant and informed him about the schemes of the company only with intent to promote the business of the company. Their intention was not to cheat or to deceive any of the customer of the company. They have never used money of the complainant or any other client of the company without their consent. It was their business module that they were providing expert advise and it was up to the complainant or the customer to follow or not to follow their advice. There is no direct allegations against the petitioners. They are in jail since 07.07.2019.