1

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL  NO(S). 1089 OF 2018 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 4606 OF 2018]

BHARAT STARS SERVICES PVT LTD.                Appellant (s)

                               VERSUS

HARSH DEV THAKUR & ANR.                       Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant has challenged the bail granted to

the first respondent.  According to the appellant, it

is  a  case  involving  embezzlement  to  the  tune  of

Rs.2.78 Crores.  The learned counsel has also made

several other submissions with regard to the method

used  for  embezzlement  and  how  the  money  has  been

transferred  in  the  name  of  respondent’s  wife,  her

brother and her father, who are the co-accused and

are absconding.

3. Be  that  as  it  may,  the  fact  remains  that

Respondent  No.  1  has  been  in  custody  since  10th

2

November, 2017.  Taking note of the fact that the

court  has  framed  charges  by  segregating  the  co-

accused, Respondent No. 1 has been released on bail,

subject  to  deposit  of  Rs.  50  Lakhs  and  other

conditions.

4. The  learned  counsel  appearing  for  the  State

supports  the  appellant  and  submits  that  there  is

every  likelihood  that  Respondent  No.  1  would  also

abscond as and when he is released on bail.

5. Smt.  Anjana  Prakash,  learned  senior  counsel

appearing for the first respondent, points out that

the  entire  investigation,  as  far  as  the  first

respondent is concerned, is complete, the available

properties of the accused and the relatives have been

attached and that the Investigating Officer has taken

into custody the entire documents pertaining to the

case and hence, there is no likelihood of the first

respondent tampering with the evidence.  It is also

submitted that being a case mainly revolving around

documentary evidence, there is also no likelihood of

influence on the witnesses.  Therefore, it is prayed

that the impugned order may be sustained.  It is also

submitted  that  the  first  respondent  is  willing  to

deposit his passport so as to ensure that he will not

flee  from  the  country,  in  addition  to  other

3

conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

6. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides,

we are of the view that the condition imposed by the

High Court, as per the impugned order, will not be

sufficient in the peculiar facts and circumstances of

the case.  The High Court has directed deposit of

Rs.50 Lakhs on the premise that the financial fraud

involved in the case is around Rs. 50 Lakhs.  Now

that it has come out that the fraud is more than

Rs.2.75 Crores, we are of the view that some more

stringent conditions should be imposed on the first

respondent.

7. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of with the

following directions :-

(a) The first respondent shall be released on bail

on  furnishing  security  to  the  satisfaction  of  the

trial court for a further amount of Rs. 75 Lakhs, in

addition to Rs. 50 Lakhs deposit, as directed by the

High Court.   

(b) He  shall  deposit  his  passport  with  the  trial

court forthwith.   

(c) He  shall  also  present  himself  at  the

jurisdictional police station once every week.

4

It is made clear that the above conditions are in

addition to the other conditions imposed by the High

Court.   

8. It will be open to the appellant to approach the

trial court for withdrawal of the money, subject to

such conditions as may be imposed by the trial court.

.......................J.               [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]  

.......................J.               [ SANJAY KISHAN KAUL ]  

New Delhi; August 28, 2018.