Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has granted bail to a woman accused of allegedly assisting her late husband in an investment fraud case involving Rs 70 lakh. Justice Milind Jadhav noted that the transaction between the parties was civil in nature but had been given a “criminal flavour” through the present complaint.
Surekha and her husband, Shriram Garde, were accused of cheating complainant Amit Goyal and his wife, Laxmi Goyal. The couple had invested Rs70 lakh in Garde’s investment venture, Bear to Gain, between 2020 and 2021, expecting monthly interest returns of 8.5% to 15%.
She was arrested on October 31, 2023, and filed bail plea before the HC through advocate Ganesh Sovani.
The FIR, registered with the Kasarvadavli Police Station in Thane, charged them under Sections 420 (cheating), 406 (criminal breach of trust), 417 (cheating), 423 (fraudulent execution of deed), 504 (intentional insult), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the IPC, along with Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (MPID) Act.
State’s advocate Sukanta Karmakar claimed that Surekha, a school teacher, misled investors by falsely presenting herself as a vice-principal and portraying her husband as an international investment trader. Initially, investors received high returns, but payments stopped as the accused cited market losses.
Sovani submitted that the complaint had received Rs 22.15 lakh of interest as returns and Rs 37.15 lakh was outstanding. To show bona fide, Sovani said that she has given an undertaking to return the balance amount.
The court noted the fact that the complainant had received Rs 22.15 lakh and had filed seven Summary Criminal Cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act over dishonored cheques. Justice Milind Jadhav remarked: “Proceedings for grant of bail cannot be used by complainants for recovery of their balance amounts. It will set a dangerous precedent.”
He further observed: “The entire flavor of the transaction between the parties is civil in nature based on documentary evidence/contract, but it is given a criminal flavor by filing the present complaint.”
Considering that Surekha’s husband, the principal accused, had passed away in custody, the court ruled that her continued detention was unnecessary. The judge highlighted that Surekha, an M.A. (History) and B.Ed graduate, was a school headmistress and had no direct control over financial dealings but had allowed her husband to use her bank account.
Granting her bail on a Rs 25,000 bond, the court directed her to report to the investigating officer and cooperate with the trial.
