1. By way of present application, under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.PC'), applicant-Dinesh Kumar Chopra has sought his release, on bail, during the pendency of trial, in case FIR No. 266 of 2023, dated 19.10.2023, registered with Police Station Balh, District Mandi, H.P., under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') and Sections 21 and 23 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Scheme Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').

2. According to the applicant, he is an innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in the present case.

3. It is the further case of the applicant that the investigation in the present case is complete. No recovery is effected from the applicant, as such, no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in judicial custody.

4. On the basis of above facts, the applicant has given, certain undertakings, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial.

5. The applicant has earlier tried his luck before the learned Special Judge, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., by filing bail application, however, the said application was dismissed by the learned Special Judge vide order dated 20.12.2023.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant has submitted that even, on the ground of parity, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail, as, his co-accused namely, Ramesh Chand, Chaman Lal, Jitender Kumar, Chander Mohan and Kewal Krishan, have already been released on bail, by this Court, vide order, dated 10th January 2023, passed in Cr.MP(M) No. 3231 of 2023, titled as Ramesh Chand vs. State of H.P., Cr.MP(M) No. 3232 of 2023 titled as Chaman Lal vs. State of H.P., Cr.MP(M) No. 3202 of 2023 titled as Jitender Kumar vs. State of H.P, Cr.M.P No. 3209 of 2023 titled as Chander Mohan vs. State of H.P and Cr.M.P(M) No. 11 of 2024 titled as Kewal Krishan vs. State of H.P, respectively.

7. On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the application.

8. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 19.10.2023, Rajesh Saini son of Dev Raj Saini moved a complaint, disclosing therein, that he has been cheated of Rs. 12,60,390/-by Ramesh Chauhan, Rohit, Rajinder Sood, Santosh Kumar and Vineet Kumar through qtrade9.com,qfx.co.in. and QFX Trade Limited Company.

8.1. According to him, in the year 2002, Rohit and Ramesh came to him and explained him about the QFX Trade Limited Company. According to them, their company is investing the amount in FOREX (online digital platform) and they used to get 5% return of the amount invested.

8.2. Being impressed from them, he has deposited a sum of Rs. 12,60,390/-in the account given by them bearing Account No. 520481028803179 of Union Bank of India, Ner Chowk and Account No. 203915140000019 of Union Bank of India, Ner Chowk. At the insistence of Rohit and Ramesh Chauhan, he has held a meeting with the Directors of the Company namely, Rajinder Sood, resident of Jogindernagar, Santosh Kumar and Vineet Kumar. The above named persons are stated to be receiving the money from the people on the pretext of good returns and they used to cheat the people. They have also established their office in Ner Chowk. The complainant, as well as, other persons have been apprised about the investment plan of 11 months. Thereafter, they have assured the return by way of cheque. On their assurance, number of persons have invested huge amount. The amount invested by the complainant was used by them, but, no amount has been returned to him. They have given him post dated cheques, but, the account, out of which, those cheques were issued, was found to be blocked.

8.3. He has further alleged, in the complaint, that they had collected the money by cheating and alluring them to return good amount. Rajinder Sood, resident of Jogindernagar, Santosh Kumar and Vineet Kumar have introduced themselves as Directors of the Company.

8.4. On the basis of above facts, he has requested that action be taken against Ramesh Chauhan having mobile No. 77194-94553, Rohit, resident of Karsog, having mobile No. 98576-40014, Rajinder Sood resident of Jogindernagar, having mobile No. 82195-08987 and Santosh Kumar and Vineet Kumar having mobile No. 97366-66666 and other persons, who are involved in this case.

9. On the basis of above facts, the police registered the FIR under Section 420 read with Section 34 IPC. Thereafter, the bank record, as disclosed by the complainant was perused. When the record was perused, it was found that from Account No. 520481028803179 of Union Bank of India, belonging to the complainant, a sum Rs. 2,00,000/-was credited in the account of QFX Trade Limited Company on 28.07.2022 and thereafter, on 10.10.2022, Rs. 5,06,340/-was transferred in the said account.

10. Apart from this, the mother of the complainant Smt. Sarswati Devi from Account No. 0911000100115496, Punjab National Bank, on dated 30.07.2022, has transferred a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-and on 10.10.2022 a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-was also transferred. From the account maintained in the name of Mansa Clothing Gallery Proprietor MR, owned by the complainant, on 25.10.2022, a sum of Rs. 2,54,000/-was found to be transferred. As such, a total sum of Rs. 12,60,340/-were found invested in the QFX Trade Limited Company.

11. On 26.10.2023, complainant Rajesh Saini has produced the printed QFX Trade Limited Investment Plan Booklet, containing seven pages. The said booklet was got prepared by Rajinder Kumar Sood, Ramesh Chauhan and Rohit to allure good returns on the investment in QFX Trade Limited. In this booklet, the information with regard to the investment plans and QFS Trade Limited has also been mentioned. In the booklet, the Company has also apprised the investors/customers about the investment plan of 11 months having 5% monthly return.

12. In the company owned by the above persons, thousands of people have invested the amount. The complainant and other thousands of people with the hope of getting good returns, through the scheme mentioned in the booklet, have been cheated. The said booklet was taken into possession by the police.

13. The complainant has also disclosed that the Directors of the Company namely, Rajinder Kumar Sood, Santosh Kumar and Vineet Kumar, in connivance with Rohit and Ramesh Chauhan, had opened offices at various places to allure the investors to invest the amount and one of such offices is at Four lane Nagchala near Shani Mandir, Tehsil Balh, District Mandi, H.P., has been opened. The Head office of the QFX Trade Limited is stated to be at 4th Floor Block-A North View Park Chandigarh Road Zirakpur. There, the above named persons used to convene meeting with the proposed investors. They also used to hatch the plan as to how to extract money from the investors.

14. Consequently, on 30.10.2023, the office of the Company at Nagchala and head office at Zirakpur were searched and the articles, which were found there, were taken into possession. The statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.

15. During investigation, it was found that the QFS Trade Company was having three Directors namely, Rajinder Kumar Sood, Vineet Kumar Bhatia and Santosh Kumar. Apart from them, in the office of the Company, Mohammad Shakil, Dinesh Kumar Chopra and Chander Mohan, were also working. They also used to held meetings with the Directors and allure the people to invest the money, as per plan.

16. During investigation, Yugam Bhardwaj and his father Praveen Bhardwaj were also associated in the investigation of the case. As per investigation, the said Company was having 10 bank accounts in IDFC bank, 4 bank accounts in Yes Bank and one bank account in IndusInd Bank. The record of these bank accounts was obtained and it was found that in the said accounts, there are transaction of crores of rupees. The investigation is stated to be going on.

17. During investigation, when the online website i.e. www.thecompanycheck,com was checked, 10 companies were found registered in the name of Director Rajinder Kumar, 5 companies in the name of Director Vineet Kumar and 2 companies and in the name of Santosh Kumar. Rajinder Kumar Sood is the Director in 10 companies and out of those three companies, Vineet Kumar was the Additional Director and in two companies, Santosh Kumar was the Additional Director and in remaining two companies, Vineet Kumar was the Director. In the above named persons, 12 companies were found registered, out of which, in 10 companies, Rajinder Kumar Sood is the Director and in the five companies, wife of Rajinder Kumar Sood namely, Neetu Devi is the Additional Director and authorized signatory.

18. Thereafter, the correspondences were made with the Registrar of Companies-cum-Official Liquidator regarding the Director identification Number and Company Identification Number.

19. On 04.11.2023, Mr. Ankit Kumar was associated in the investigation. According to him, he is the Data Entry Operator in the QFX Trade Limited and he used to download the IDs of the investors from the Company's website. He used to keep the said record, as per directions of Rajinder Kumar Sood, in the website qtrade.com. The Master Administrator (Technical) of the company are Rajinder Kumar Sood and Dinesh Kumar Chopra. They have created a link http:// qtrade9.com/QPRIME@ADMIN/Index.phppage=welcome. The user and password of the same was prepared by Dinesh Kumar Chopra and apart from this person, Rajinder Kumar Sood and Dinesh Kumar Chopra were having the access to the said link. Later on, the said password was found to be changed. According to the police, the same has either been changed by Rajinder Kumar Sood or Dinesh Kumar Chopra (applicant). Ankit Kumar has downloaded the data of the investors in the pen drive and handed over the same to the police. The person who has designed the software i.e. Aman Deep Singh, son of Tarlok Singh, was also associated in the investigation of the case, who has disclosed that Dinesh Kumar Chopra (applicant) in the month of November, 2022 came to their company and requested him to get the performance of the company improved.

20. In nut-shell, it is the case of the police that the QFX Trade Company, through its introducing brokers, in connivance with the Directors and other persons, had hatched a conspiracy and got the money of the persons invested in the Unregulated Deposit Scheme. The Directors of the company had fled away from the country and the introducing brokers had promoted the scheme by holding meetings with the proposed investors.

21. Lastly, it has been stated that had the introducing brokers been not motivated the investors to invest the money in the Unregulated Deposit Scheme, then, the offence could have not been committed.

22. On the basis of above facts, the prayer of bail has been opposed mainly on the ground that the accused persons had hatched a conspiracy with the Directors namely, Rajinder Kumar Sood, Santosh Kumar and Vineet and being the introducing brokers/promoters/agents, they had conducted the meetings on behalf of QFX company and promoted the scheme of the Company. The amount is also stated to be transferred in the name of the accused persons and, in case, the applicant is released on bail, he may withdraw the said amount and also delete the record relating to the case.

23. It has also been mentioned in the status report that in case the applicant is released on bail, he may indulgence in similar activities.

24. On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the applications.

25. Applicant was arrested on 09.11.2023 and presently, he is in judicial custody.

26. The status report is silent qua the fact as to how the custodial interrogation of the applicant is now required by the police.

27. So far as the apprehensions, which have been expressed by the police, in the status report, against the applicant is concerned, for those apprehensions, reasonable conditions can be imposed, in case, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail.

28. The chances of commencement of trial, in near future are not so bright, as such, the applicant cannot be kept in judicial custody, that too, for indefinite period. The maximum punishment for the offences is seven years. Considering the said fact, the application deserves to be allowed.

29. No other criminal history of the applicant has been mentioned in the status reports nor argued by learned Additional Advocate General during the course of arguments.

30. The role, as alleged by the police, in the status report, will be proved during the course of trial. Considering the fact that the punishment can only be inflicted after the full fledged trial, dismissal of his bail application, at this stage, would be nothing but, punishing him before the conclusion of trial.

31. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the bail application is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed.

32. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in case FIR No. 266 of 2023, dated 19.10.2023, registered with Police Station Balh, District Mandi, H.P., under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC and Sections 21 and 23 of the Act, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-, with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. This order, however, shall be subject to the following conditions:

"a) The applicant shall make himself available for the purpose of interrogation, if so required and regularly attend the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application;

b) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever;

c) The applicant shall not make any inducement, threat or promises to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer; and

d) The applicant shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court."

33. Any of the observations made hereinabove shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case, as, these observations are confined only to the disposal of the present bail application.

34. It is made clear that the respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions is found to be violated by the applicant.

35. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of Sub-Jail Kaithu, District Shimla, H.P. through e-mail, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the e-prison software.

36. In case, the applicant is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent of Sub-Jail Kaithu, District Shimla, is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Shimla. The Superintendent of the concerned jail, is further directed that if the applicant fails to furnish the bail bonds, as per the order passed by this Court, within a period of one month from today, then, the said fact be submitted to this Court.