Bombay High Court
SHAIKH SAJID HUSSAINversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
- Bench
- NEELA KEDAR GOKHALE
Holding
Bail is granted to the applicant on stringent conditions.
Summary
The applicant, Deepak Kumar Dhulichand Jain, sought bail in a criminal case (C.R.No.41 of 2025) alleging offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 1999, relating to a alleged Ponzi scheme run by his son Ankit Jain and co‑accused. The prosecution alleged that the applicant, a chartered accountant, encouraged depositors to invest and facilitated fund transfers, though he claimed he merely wished depositors ‘best luck’ and returned more money than received. The court examined the applicant’s role, noting the lack of a direct complaint against him, his senior citizen status, and a prior judgment finding no active participation. While acknowledging the seriousness of the scheme and pending forensic audit, the court held that bail could be granted on stringent conditions to ensure his presence and prevent tampering. Consequently, the bail application was allowed with a detailed bond and compliance requirements.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant, alleged to have facilitated a Ponzi scheme, is entitled to bail pending trial.
- Whether the applicant’s senior citizen status and lack of direct evidence of intimidation warrant bail.
- Whether the pending forensic audit and the seriousness of the offences preclude bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 111, 115(2), 316(5), 318(4), 3(5), 351(3), 352
- Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- Ponzi scheme
- financial fraud
- senior citizen
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
Judgment
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Deepak Kumar Dhulichand Jain ...Applicant
Versus
The Senior Inspector of Police and Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4531 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Rashmin Labhshanker Trivedi ...Applicant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4530 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Nadirkhan Azadkhan Pathan ...Applicant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4711 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Deepak Kumar Dhulichand Jain ...Applicant
Page 1 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
Versus
The Senior Inspector of Police and Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4709 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Deepak Kumar Dhulichand Jain ...Applicant
Versus
The Senior Inspector of Police and Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4716 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Shaikh Sajid Hussain ...Applicant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4710 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Deepak Kumar Dhulichand Jain ...Applicant
Versus
The Senior Inspector of Police and Anr. ...Respondents
Page 2 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4540 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Abhijit Hiraman Garude ...Applicant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4702 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Surekha Samdhan Kadam And Anr. ...Applicants
Versus
The Senior Inspector of Police and Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4538 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Sujit Kumar Patnaik ...Applicant
Versus
The Senior Inspector of Police and Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4543 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Murari Shivpoojan Chaubey ...Applicant
Page 3 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
Versus
The Senior Inspector of Police and Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4541 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Chetan Janabhau Bomble ...Applicant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4712 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Suresh Shrimant Chavan ...Applicant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4719 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Madhuri Pandey ...Applicant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4708 OF 2025
IN
Page 4 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Sangeeta Shashikant Mahajan ...Applicant
Versus
The Senior Inspector of Police and Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4700 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Ashdin Viraf Batliwala ...Applicant
Versus
The Senior Inspector of Police and Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4544 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Devendra Kishor Verma ...Applicant
Versus
The Senior Inspector of Police and Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4533 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Anburaj Ammasi Kullan ...Applicant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent
Page 5 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4532 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Anand Bardhan Gautam ...Applicant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4528 OF 2025
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4161 OF 2025
Parvej Janmohommed Gauri ...Applicant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent
Mr. Taraq Sayed, with Swapnil Wagh, Mamta Tiwari,
Prathmesh Bhosle, Ashwinii Achari, Anish Pereira, Aryan
Kotal, for the Applicant.
Ms. Gauri S. Rao, APP for the Respondent - State.
Mr. Nimesh Mehta, with Agrataa Dubay, for the Applicants in
all the Interim Applications.
Mr. Sachin Jadhav, API attached to Property Cell, Crime
Branch, Mumbai, present.
CORAM DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.
DATED: 08TH JANUARY 2026
PC:-
Page 6 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
1. By this Application, the Applicant seeks his enlargement
on bail in connection with C.R.No. 41 of 2025 dated 17 th
June, 2025 registered with the Property Cell, DCB, CID, Crime
Branch, Mumbai for the offences punishable under Sections
111, 115(2), 3(5), 316(5), 318(4), 351(3) and 352 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’) and Sections 3 and 4
of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in
Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 (‘MPID’).
2. There are in all four accused persons involved in the
present case. The present Applicant is Accused No.4. There
are as many as 122 witnesses/ victims and 30 more on
account of which, the prosecution is in the process of filing
the supplementary charge-sheet. As per the case of the
prosecution, the principal accused namely, Ankit Jain, son of
the present Applicant, through the firm M/s. A. J. Enterprises,
made representations to the general public at large that the
proprietary firm was in the process of commissioning a
factory, manufacturing paper at the Boisar. He invited
Page 7 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
investors from the general public and promised high returns.
He was joined by Co-accused. Along with him, representations
were also made by co-accused Omkar Singh and Hetul Ranka.
The Applicant is 65 years of age and is a Chartered
Accountant by profession. It is alleged that after receiving
deposits from the general public, some returns were given to
the depositors. However, ultimately, cheques were
dishonoured. As far as the present Applicant is concerned, it is
alleged that he was present in the office of Ankit Jain while
some depositors / witnesses came to visit his son, Ankit Jain
and deposit their money and the Applicant also encouraged
them to do so, assuring them that it is a good investment.
Admittedly, certain amounts were received in the bank
account of the present Applicant, however, additional
amounts were in fact deposited from his bank account to the
bank account of M/s. A. J. Enterprises. On the complaints of
the witnesses, the FIR came to be registered and the Applicant
along with Co-accused, were arrested.
Page 8 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
3. The Applicant made an application seeking bail before
the City Civil & Sessions Court, Greater Bombay, however, by
order dated 22nd July 2025, the said application was rejected.
Hence, the Applicant has filed the present Bail Application for
the reliefs as prayed.
4. Mr. Taraq Sayed, learned counsel appearing for the
Applicant, at the very outset, submits that there is no role
attributed to the present Applicant, save and except that he
was present in the office of the principal accused i.e., his son,
Ankit Jain, when he also encouraged depositors by giving
assurance that they will receive higher returns and the said
deposits were a good investment. He has also taken me
through certain statements of witnesses, wherein the only
allegation against him, is that he encouraged the
complainants to deposit their amounts with his son’s
proprietary firm. In fact, Mr. Sayed submits that an amount
of Rs.1.52 crores had come into his bank but he has returned
an amount of Rs.1.72 crores in the account of M/s. A. J.
Page 9 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
Enterprises. Hence, he has returned the amount more than
what he has received in his bank account. He also submits
that the Applicant is a senior citizen and he is in fact, being
punished for the acts and conduct of his son. He submits that
there is no allegation against him of having intimidated any
witnesses in the offence. In these circumstances, he prays that
the Applicant be released on bail.
5. Ms. Gauri Rao, learned APP representing the State,
contests the Bail Application. She submits that the Applicant is
a Chartered Accountant and was well aware of the activities
of his son. In fact, he had allowed the use of his bank account
for transfer and received an amount of Rs.1.52 Crores in his
bank account. However, she fairly concedes that an amount of
Rs.1.72 Crores has been returned to the proprietor. She
submits that the total amount involved is more than Rs.10
Crores. She submits that depositors invested their hard
earned money and did not receive any benefits on their
Page 10 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
investments. In these circumstances, she submits that the
offence is serious and the Bail Application be rejected.
6. Mr. Nimesh Mehta, learned counsel, appears for the
Intervenors/Witnesses/Victims. He has drawn my attention to
various WhatsApp chats between the Applicant and the Co-
accused. He submits that a group on WhatsApp was created as
‘DJAJHR’, reflecting the initials of the Applicant, his son
namely, Ankit Jain and Co-accused, Hetul Ranka. In a text
message on the WhatsApp group, the present Applicant has
advised his son, Ankit Jain, that a new place should be found
and a new name for the company must be explored. He has
also suggested that his son should seek assistance of brokers
such as, 99 Acres, Magic Bricks, etc., and put their
requirement on the website. Mr. Mehta, has also pointed out a
chat of 26th March 2025 wherein the Applicant has texted his
son, details of gold and amounts received from the investors
and their calculations. He submits that the Applicant, is the
kingpin of the entire ponzi scheme and the scam run by the
Page 11 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
Co-accused and being the principal proponent of the crime,
releasing him on bail is likely to encourage the Applicant to
commit further crimes. Mr. Mehta also states that some of the
witnesses had gone to the office of M/s. A. J. Enterprises, to
demand return of their money, at that time the Applicant and
others had beaten them up and assaulted them. Ms. Rao,
learned APP, however, on instructions from the Investigating
Officer, submits that it was Ankit Jain, Omkar Singh and Hetul
Ranka, who beat up the witnesses and the present Applicant,
i.e., Deepak Jain was not involved in the same.
7. Be that as it may, there is no complaint made by the
witnesses against the present Applicant. However, there are
complaints made by the witnesses against the Co-accused. Mr.
Mehta thus, prays that the Bail Application of the Applicant be
rejected.
8. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the
respective parties and perused the record with their
assistance.
Page 12 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
9. Admittedly, more than 122 victims are duped by the
Applicant along with his son and 2 colleagues, namely, Omkar
Singh and Hetul Ranka. However, it prima facie appears that
the only role attributed to the present Applicant is that, at the
time when his son, Ankit Jain along with Co-accused, were
selling fake schemes and luring the victims, the Applicant was
there in the office, assuring the victims, that the schemes
floated by his son and the Co-accused were overboard and
they would receive high returns. Mr. Mehta also pointed to
certain bank statements of the Applicant, which indicate that
he has also received some amounts in his own personal
account. However, an amount of Rs.1.72 Crores was allegedly
refunded by him by depositing the same in the account of
M/s. A. J. Enterprises. Mr. Mehta, however, says that this is
pulling the wool over the eyes of the Investigating Agencies as
the entire scheme was based on circulating funds. There was a
modus operandi in which money refunded was also brought
back to his own account. Be that as it may, as things stand
today, the Co-accused are in custody. The serious allegations
Page 13 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
of duping the witnesses are largely against the Co-accused,
Ankit Jain, Omkar Singh and Hetul Ranka. The role of the
Applicant, prima facie, seems to be of supporting his son
albeit he has concealed and screened various activities of his
son.
10. The Applicant is a 65 year-old senior citizen.
Investigation is still underway and the Forensic Audit Report
is yet awaited. Ms. Rao, learned APP, interjects and submits
that all the bank accounts are already seized and bank
statements have been submitted before the Forensic Auditors.
Mr. Mehta also pointed out that the Applicant has an
antecedent against him. However, Mr. Taraq Sayed, learned
counsel appearing for the Applicant, has brought to my
attention, order dated 4th November 2020 passed by the
learned Single Judge of this Court wherein the said offence
was again committed by Ankit Jain, Hetul Ranka and Omkar
Singh. This Court also found that there was no role attributed
to the present Applicant and he was only present in the office
Page 14 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
when the depositors had visited M/s. A. J. Enterprises. The
present Applicant had only wished the depositors ‘Best Luck’.
It appears that the Co-accused Ankit Jain has used his father’s
presence and name in duping the investors. The Applicant,
although a Chartered Accountant, is bound to have
knowledge regarding his son’s nefarious activities, however,
this cannot be the only ground to deny bail to him. It is
clearly demonstrated by Ms. Gauri Rao, learned APP, that it is
Mr. Ankit Jain, Hetul Ranka and Omkar Singh, who
committed the alleged offence and are the kingpins of the
scam. Looking to the number of witnesses and the fact that
the Forensic Audit Report is yet awaited, however, keeping in
mind that all the bank accounts are already seized and the
bank statements are already before the Forensic Auditors, I
am of the view that interest of justice will be sub-served, if the
present Applicant is granted bail on stringent conditions and it
is ordered as under:-
Page 15 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
ORDER
i) The Applicant be released on bail, on executing PR Bond
in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two local sureties in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court;
ii) The Applicant is permitted to furnish provisional cash
bail of Rs.2,00,000/- for his release immediately and file
undertaking that he will provide two local sureties in the like
amount of Rs.2,00,000/- within a period of four weeks after
his release, which shall be accepted by the Trial Court. The
Applicant shall provide the sureties as directed;
iii) The Applicant shall inform his latest place of residence
and contact number to the jurisdictional Trial Court as well as
Police Station, within which jurisdiction he would stay, within
one week from his release;
iv) He shall mark his presence in the jurisdictional Police
Station, once a month on first Monday between 9.00 am to
12.00 pm and as and when required by the Investigating
Officer till framing of the charges;
Page 16 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
v) The Applicant is directed to remain present before the
Trial Court on the dates fixed by the Trial Court unless
exempted by the Trial Court and no unnecessary
adjournments shall be sought by the Applicant;
vi) The Applicant shall not leave territorial jurisdiction of
the country without prior permission of the Trial Court and
shall surrender his passport with the jurisdictional Trial Court,
within one week from the date of his release;
vii) The Applicant shall not enter jurisdictional limits of the
city of Mumbai, Thane and Palghar during the pendency of
the trial save and except to attend the Trial Court as well as
the Police Station concerned;
viii) Any attempt by the Applicant to influence or threaten
the witnesses or tamper with the prosecution evidence,
directly or indirectly, shall result in cancellation of bail;
ix) The Trial Court is also at liberty to impose any other
condition on the Applicant as it deems fit;
Page 17 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Shivgan 901-BA-4161-2025.doc
x) Any infraction of the aforesaid conditions shall entail
cancellation of bail.
11. The Bail Application is allowed in the above terms and is
accordingly disposed of.
12. Since the Bail Application itself is disposed of, nothing
survives in the Interim Applications therein and the same are
also disposed of.
13. It is made clear that the observations made herein are
prima facie and are confined to this Application and the
learned Trial Judge to decide the case on its own merits,
uninfluenced by the observations made herein.
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J)
Digitally
signed by
SHAMBHAVI
SHAMBHAVI NILESH
NILESH SHIVGAN
SHIVGAN Date:
2026.01.09
20:21:31
+0530
Page 18 of 18
th
8 January 2026
Checking your session…