Delhi High Court denies anticipatory bail to builder accused of duping over 800 homebuyers

The Delhi High Court recently observed that granting anticipatory bail to a Gurugram based builder accused of duping over 800 homebuyers and siphoning money received from banks, will not only impact the case but also the trust reposed by the society in criminal justice system (Sidharth Chauhan v Govt of NCT of Delhi through SHO)..“Notably, the grant of anticipatory bail in a case of such large magnitude is further likely to have an adverse impact not only in the progress of the case, but also on the trust reposed by the society in the criminal justice system. This Court also cannot discount the fact that in case the applicant is granted the concession of anticipatory bail, he may again tamper with the evidence/witnesses and/or threaten them, as has been the case in the past,” the Court said. .Single-judge Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri thus denied bail to Sidharth Chauhan and also withdrew his interim protection from arrest..Chauhan had been charged with Sections 406/420/409/120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) by Delhi Police’s Economic Affairs Wing.It is alleged that he started two housing projects in Gurugram and received bookings from several buyers but neither of the projects were near completion. Chauhan was also accused of misappropriating and diverting funds to the tune of ₹408.74 crore from the Oriental Bank of Commerce (now Punjab National Bank).The Court was further informed that while on interim protection, Chauhan had not only threatened his employees from cooperating with the investigation but even the Interim Resolution Professional received a threatening phone call from him..Justice Ohri held that the present case is not simpliciter of delay in construction as the homebuyers had paid money out of their life savings or obtained loans from Banks yet flats was not delivered to them. The Court noted that investigations and audits have further revealed that the money collected from the homebuyers and loans from banks were not utilized appropriately in the construction of projects..The Bench further said that by not making a reasonable offer for settlement, Chauhan not only misled the Court and merely bought time but he abused the concession of interim protection by threatening and intimidating witnesses.Justice Ohri added that after consideration of material on record and submission of parties there was a prima facie case that the accused misappropriated and siphoned off funds collected from homebuyers and banks. Justice Ohri added the magnitude of misappropriation and gravity of offense necessitate his custodial interrogation to unearth the money trail and to prevent him from attempting to tamper with evidence and threaten witnesses.“This Court appreciates that there is a qualitative difference between interrogation of the accused while in custody and while he is enjoying protection against arrest. In the present case, it appears that the applicant has been attempting to mislead the Court in the name of efforts at settlement, instead of making any serious effort at addressing claims of the aggrieved homebuyers, while also tampering with the evidence and threatening the witnesses. Under these circumstances, his custodial interrogation is deemed necessary,” the Court held.It, therefore, withdrew the interim protection granted to him and dismissed the bail applications..While Chauhan was represented by Senior Advocate Maninder Singh along with Advocates RK Handoo, Niranjan Singh, Shiv Mangal Sharma, Saurabh Rajpal and Rajiv Singh Pilania, Additional Public Prosecutor Neelam Sharma appeared for the state. The complainants, meanwhile, were represented by advocates Ajay Laroia, Tarun Gupta, Madhu Laroia, Jainika Mohan, Rajinder Kumar and Sandesh Kumar..[Read Judgment]