On Friday ( 27th March) special court rejected Deepak and Hemanti Kulkarni’s bail application and application challenging invocation of section 409 of Indian penal code ( IPC ) in this case.
Earlier ( on 20th March) National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ( NCLAT) stayed its own order and refrained DSKDL and its Directors and officers from alienating or transferring any rights.
Initially, Deepak and Hemanti Kulkarni of D.S.Kulkarni developer’s ltd (DSKDL) successfully managed to avoid their arrest in by deceiving various agencies in a multi-crore investment scam. However now, it has become very difficult for them to convince or fool any agency.
While rejecting bail applications of accused, Justice Utpat observed that, if the applicants ( Deepak and Hemanti) could not raise any amount when they were not under any restraint, it is very difficult to ascertain, how they would raise the funds for returning the amounts of depositors. Even the applicants have not put forth any viable proposal before this court to ascertain their intention of returning the amounts of depositors.
Justice Utpat Further observed that the facts on record further prima facie show that during the period granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and Hon'ble High Court, the accused could not furnish the amount of Rs.50 crores as directed by the Hon'ble High Court. Not only that, the evidence on record prima facie shows that the accused put forth sham proposals showing that they were depositing the amount of Rs.50 crores as directed by the Hon'ble High Court.
 |
| image Courtsey Financial Express |
Deepak and Hemant's advocate Shivade also claimed bail on health ground to Deepak Kulkarni.
However justice Utpat observed that, there is no any recent medical report filed on record which shows that the physical condition of Deepak Kulkarni is not well. On the contrary, when hearing of bail application was going on, the presence of accused was secured on video conferencing and he was raising some problems before the court in very nice manner.
At his juncture, PP Pravin Chavan claimed that the doctor who gave a report of a clot in Deepak Kulkarni's brain was arrested for anti-superstition activities in Deenanath Mangeshkar hospital. FIR against him has been filed under section 3 of The Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013.
Earlier defending accused Deepak and Hemanti advocate Shrikant shivade claimed that since the applicants are in jail, they cannot raise money for returning the amounts of depositors.
He further showed the inability of the applicants to raise the funds as all the properties of the applicants have been attached by the Investigating agencies as well as the accounts have been seized.
Shivade also submitted that the applicants should be granted bail for six months, so as to generate funds to return the amount of depositors and in case, they fail to do the same, the situation should be reviewed after six months.
Confronting Shivade’s argument Special Prosecutor Shri Pravin Chavan put following Points
1. There is siphoning of huge amounts by DSKDL Company and its subsidiaries. For that purpose, he relied on the statement of one employee of DSKDL (name not disclosed on the oral request of PP ) and submitted as to how the applicants and their relatives started different companies i.e.DSK and Company, DSK Associates, DSK & Sons, DSK & Associates, DSK Brothers, D.S.Kulkarni and Brothers, DSK Constructions, DSK Enterprises, D.S.Kulkarni & Associates and D.S.Kulkarni & Sons and accepted various amounts from public, loan amount from banks and siphoned off the said amount.
2. Some of the firms established by the applicants and their relatives were not even registered and no permission was sought from SEBI for collecting money from the public. In spite of that, Shri Chavan submitted that the accused have collected huge funds.
3. The applicants have obtained Rs.1374 crores by way of loan from various banks, Rs.1153 crores by way of deposits from various persons, Rs.470 crores from flat holders, Rs.110 crores by way of debentures and Rs.123 crores by way of Totoya Finance. He further submitted that there was a large conspiracy between applicants and their relatives and they have siphoned off the said amount and the said aspect is under Investigation
4. The applicants do not have any property in their names to be sold and therefore, their release for the said purpose is out of the question. He further submitted that even if all the flats in the housing schemes launched by the applicants/accused are sold, it cannot generate the necessary funds to repay the amount of depositors as it requires a huge amount to complete the construction work.
5. Applicants are in arrears of Rs.61 crores towards Sales Tax payment and are also in arrears of some amounts towards Income Tax and they have to pay salaries of their servants.
6. After the rejection of anticipatory bail of the applicants by this court, the applicants had moved the Hon'ble High Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court for anticipatory bail and the Hon'ble Bombay High Court had granted sufficient time to the accused to collect money. However, during that time, the accused have not collected any amount. There is no possibility that the accused would generate the funds if released on bail.
7. If the applicants are released on bail, they may tamper with the evidence or they may abscond. He further submitted that the investigation of such a serious crime is at a very sensitive stage and as such.
Upholding Chavan’s point Justice Utpat rejected Deepak and Hemant's bail application
Rejecting application challenging invocation of section 409 of Indian penal code ( IPC ) in this case. Justice Utpat upheld argument PP Pravin Chavan that Directors of DSKDL company i.e. Deepak and Hemanti by accepting the amount in the fixed deposits from the public at large, have become the agents of those persons and therefore, they fall within the purview of sec.409 of I.P.C.
Earlier on 20th April National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ( NCLAT ) gave one more shock to Deepak Kulkarni and his family. NCLAT stayed its own order and refrained DSKDL and its Directors and officers from alienating or transferring any rights.
On 13th March National Company Law Tribunal ( NCLT) had directed DSK Kulkarni Developers Ltd (DSKDL), Deepak Sakharam Kulkarni (DS Kulkarni), his family members as well key managerial persons and directors in the DSK Group to disclose their all assets, including bank accounts owned by them in India and anywhere in the world.
The Tribunal had also directed stock exchanges to restrain trading in DSKDL while asking depositories to freeze securities owned by the Kulkarni family and key managerial persons and other directors of the company.
The Tribunal had barred them from mortgaging or creating a charge on any immovable and movable properties owned by them anywhere. Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) under the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) had filed the petition.
However, NCLAT had ex-parte stayed abovementioned order on the application of Shirish kulkarni.
Serious fraud investigation Organisation ( SFIO) has appealed against said order and NCLAT then stayed its own order and refrained DSKDL and its Directors and officers from alienating or transferring any rights.
Related Stories
Subscribe for Free
To receive free emails or free RSS feeds, please, subscribe to Vijay Kumbhar's Exclusive News & Analysis
RTI KATTA is a platform to empower oneself through discussions amongst each other to solve their problems by using Right to Information act, Every Sunday at Chittaranjan Watika, Model Colony,Shivaji nagar, Pune, between 9.30 to 10.30 A.M.
RTI Resource Person, RTI Columnist
Phone – 9923299199
Website – http://vijaykumbhar.com
Email – admin@vijaykumbhar.com
Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/kvijay14
Twitter - https://twitter.com/Vijaykumbhar62
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/user/kvijay14
