Bombay High Court
RAMESH JOSHI PRESENTLY LODGED IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY AT CENTRAL JAIL COLVALEversusSTATE OF GOA THR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR AND ANR
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The High Court granted regular bail to the applicant, subject to strict conditions.
Summary
Ramesh Joshi, a managing director of M/s R.J. Papillon Nidhi Ltd., was arrested for alleged conspiracy to defraud investors of approximately Rs.2.38 crore through illegal deposit schemes, violating IPC sections 406, 409, 420, 120B and several state financial statutes. After the FIR (30 Oct 2024) and charge‑sheet (24 Mar 2026), the Sessions Court denied his bail on grounds of seriousness and non‑residence. Joshi’s counsel argued his cooperation, lack of prior criminal record, and a partial refund of Rs.14.5 lakh as reasons to grant bail. The prosecution contended the offences were grave, investigation ongoing, and risk of flight or tampering existed, citing Supreme Court precedents. The High Court, after weighing the material, held that continued detention was unnecessary and granted regular bail with stringent conditions, including a PR bond, sureties, and restrictions on travel and witness contact.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted in a case involving serious economic offences under IPC and specific Goa financial statutes.
- Whether the applicant's cooperation, lack of antecedents, and partial restitution outweigh the risk of flight, tampering, or obstruction of investigation.
- Whether the conditions imposed are sufficient to safeguard the prosecution’s interests while allowing bail.
Legislation cited
- Banning of Unregulated Deposits Schemes Act, 2019 — s. 3, 4
- Goa Protection of Interests of Depositors (Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 — s. 3, 5
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 120B, 406, 409, 420
- Prize Chit and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act — s. 4, 5
Subjects
- bail
- economic offences
- fraud
- misappropriation
- IPC
- financial schemes
- flight risk
- cooperation
- partial refund
- Goa
Judgment
2026:BHC-GOA:1834
(1) crmab-21-2026.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BAIL) NO.21 OF 2026
RAMESH JOSHI PRESENTLY LODGED IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY
AT CENTRAL JAIL COLVALE
VERSUS
STATE OF GOA THR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR AND ANR.
…
Mr. Vaibhav Amonkar with Mr. Raj Chodankar, Advocates for
Applicant.
Mr. Preetam Talaulikar, Additional Public Prosecutor with Ms. Sara
Desai, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
…
CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
RESERVED ON : 08th SEPTEMBER, 2026.
PRONOUNCED ON : 11th SEPTEMBER, 2026.
FINAL ORDER:-
1. The applicant seeks regular bail in connection with FIR
No.3/2024 registered with EOC Police Station, North Goa for offence
punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 120B of Indian Penal Code,
Sections 3 and 5 of Goa Protection of Interests of Depositors (Financial
Establishments) Act, 1999, Sections 4 and 5 of Prize Chit and Money
Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act and Sections 3 and 4 of Banning of
Unregulated Deposits Schemes Act, 2019.
2. The investigation was set in motion on the basis of
information/complaint dated 30.10.2024 given by Mr. Ramesh N.
Shirodker, Police Inspector, Economic Offences Cell, Police Station,
Panaji-Goa alleging that accused persons who are Managing Directors,
Directors and Agents of M/s. R. J. Papillon Nidhi Limited hatched
(2) crmab-21-2026.odt
criminal conspiracy and induced investors/depositors to invest in
company through various schemes in nature of Fixed Deposits, Monthly
Recurring Deposits on promise of exponential returns. Upon receiving
entrusted funds, accused persons dishonestly misappropriated money
and converted them to their own use by investing in R. J. Papillon
Multitrade Private Limited. The accused failed to repay promised
returns/maturity amount to investors and fled by closing company/bank
and cheated investors for amount of approximately Rs.2,37,96,622/-.
3. The aforesaid information culminated into registration of Crime
No.3/2024. The applicant has been arrested on 27.01.2026. After
completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed in Sessions
Case (Ors.) No.11/2026, which is pending trial in Court of Principal
Sessions Judge, South Goa at Margaon. The applicant moved
application for grant of regular bail before Sessions Court, which came
to be rejected vide order dated 08.07.2026 observing that offence is
serious and applicant is not resident of State of Goa.
4. Mr. Vaibhav Amonkar, learned Advocate appearing for applicant
submits that offence has been registered in year 2024. The applicant co-
operated during course of investigation. He has submitted necessary
details to Investigating Officer from date of registration of offence till
date of his arrest. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet is filed.
Further detention of applicant would not be necessary.
(3) crmab-21-2026.odt
5. Per contra, Mr. Preetam Talaulikar, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor vehemently opposes application for bail contending that
applicant alongwith other accused defrauded general public for amount
of Rs.2 crores by promising exponential returns on investment. The
schemes run by applicant and his company were illegal. The applicant
failed to co-operate during course of investigation. Till this date,
investigation as to money trail is going on. The release of applicant
may hamper smooth prosecution. The possibility of jumping bail
cannot be denied. The financial offences are at rise. He, therefore,
urges to reject applicant’s application for bail. In support of his
contentions he relies upon observation of Supreme Court in case of
Nimmagadda Prasad Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation1, Deepak
Pandurang Dalvi Vs. The State of Maharashtra (Bail Application
No.4460/2024 decided on 06.08.2025) and Rakesh Mittal Vs. Ajay Pal
Gupta alias Sonu Chaudhary and Another2.
6. Having considered submissions advanced by learned Advocates
appearing for respective parties, it can be observed that FIR has been
registered on 30.10.2024. The applicant has been arrested on
27.01.2026. On 24.03.2026, upon completion of investigation, charge-
sheet has been filed. The applicant moved application for grant of
regular bail before Sessions Court, which came to be rejected on
08.07.2026. The sum and substance of allegation against applicant is
1 2013 (7) SCC 466.
2 2026 SCC OnLine SC 211.
(4) crmab-21-2026.odt
that accused persons being Managing Directors, Directors and Agents of
company namely M/s. R. J. Papillon Nidhi Limited lured
investors/depositors to invest in their company through various schemes
promising high returns on investments. The investment worth
Rs.2,37,97,622/- has been made by victims in various schemes. The
accused persons operated through office at Vasco, Goa and attracted
huge investments through advertisement of their scheme.
7. On arrest of applicant, it has been revealed that that Board of
Director of M/s. R. J. Papillon Nidhi Limited violated provisions of Act,
Rules and Bye-laws of company. They mismanaged affairs of company
incurring huge losses to company and investors.
8. Perusal of statement of witnesses depicts that applicant had
floated various schemes of R. J. Papillon Nidhi Bank and M/s. R. J.
Papillon Nidhi Limited. The record indicates that some of investors
were given returns through cheques. However, such cheques were
dishonored and in many cases there is failure to return of money. The
record indicates that applicant invested said amount in sister concerns
and ultimately, failed to return amount to investors.
9. Although prima facie there is material against applicant depicting
commission of offence alleged, fact remains that FIR has been
registered in year 2024. The record indicates that applicant has been
arrested in January 2026 and prior to that applicant continuously co-
(5) crmab-21-2026.odt
operated investigation machinery. The relevant record regarding receipt
of money and its further investments, forms part of charge-sheet. Prima
facie, collection of amount and its investment by applicant’s company
was not barred by law. Although charge-sheet is filed in March 2026,
except applicant no other accused has been arrested. The possibility of
framing of charges and commencement of trial in near future is not
discernible. There are no criminal antecedents except registration of
Crime No.2321/2024 at Mumbra Police Station for similar transaction.
The applicant is behind bar for approximately 8 months. Any Further
detention of applicant would not be necessary. The interest of
prosecution can be protected by putting necessary conditions. It is
brought to notice of this Court that applicant has refunded amount of
Rs.14,53,843/- after his arrest, which credits to his bonafides. In this
backdrop, case is made out to grant regular bail. Hence, following
order:
ORDER
a. Criminal Application is allowed on following conditions:
(i) The applicant be released on bail in connection with
FIR No.3/2024 registered with EOC Police Station,
North Goa for offence punishable under Sections 406,
409, 420, 120B of Indian Penal Code, Sections 3 and 5
of Goa Protection of Interests of Depositors (Financial
Establishments) Act, 1999, Sections 4 and 5 of Prize
(6) crmab-21-2026.odt
Chit and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act
and Sections 3 and 4 of Banning of Unregulated De-
posits Schemes Act, 2019 on executing PR Bond in
sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs.One Lakh Only) with one or
two local sureties in the like amount;
(ii) The applicant shall attend Trial Court concerned on
every date as fixed by Court unless exempted by orders
of Trial Court concerned or as required by Investigating
Officer;
(iii) The applicant shall also attend Police Station concerned
as and when required by written notice to do so by In-
vestigating Officer;
(iv) If applicant holds a passport, he shall deposit same with
Police Station concerned;
(v) The applicant shall not leave India without permission
of Trial Court;
(vi) The applicant shall not tamper or attempt to influence
or contact complainant, witnesses or any person con-
cerned with case;
(vii) The applicant shall inform his latest place of residence
and contact number immediately after being released
and/or change of residence or mobile details, if any,
(7) crmab-21-2026.odt
from time to time to Court seized of matter and to In-
vestigating Officer to Police Station concerned;
(viii) The applicant to co-operate with conduct of trial;
(ix) Any infraction of aforesaid conditions shall entail can-
cellation of bail.
(S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
Devendra/September-2026
Checking your session…