Bombay High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail in Petroleum Adulteration Case
Court Highlights Serious Economic Offences and Necessity for Custodial Interrogation to Protect Public Interest
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has rejected the anticipatory bail application of Hetan Ram Gangwani and others involved in a high-profile case concerning the adulteration of petroleum products. The case, registered under Crime No. 346 of 2024 with Uran Police Station, District Raigad, involves allegations of serious economic offences, including the adulteration of diesel fuel through layered transactions aimed at evading regulatory scrutiny and causing substantial financial loss to the State.
Justice Amit Borkar, presiding over the case, emphasized the gravity of the allegations, stating that such economic offences impact public safety and the economy, necessitating a stringent approach. The court underscored the need for custodial interrogation to unearth the conspiracy and safeguard public interest, thereby rejecting the anticipatory bail application submitted under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
The prosecution, represented by Mrs. Mahalakshmi Ganapathy, argued that the applicants orchestrated a complex scheme involving multiple entities-Sole Bloom Pvt. Ltd., Siddhidhata Trading Company, and Naksh Trading Company-all controlled through a common email ID linked to accused No.2, Yash Gangwani. This arrangement, the court noted, suggested a deliberate design to camouflage the true nature of transactions, effectively indicating that the accused had control over the financial dealings across these companies.
The court highlighted the importance of custodial interrogation, considering the ongoing investigation into the import, storage, and alleged diversion of petroleum products. Justice Borkar noted that granting anticipatory bail at this stage could hamper the investigation, particularly in tracing the money trail and identifying beneficiaries. The court further pointed out that the offences alleged are not merely private disputes but have far-reaching implications for public safety and the economy, as adulterated fuel poses risks of fire, explosion, and damage to vehicles and machinery.
Addressing the applicants' contentions regarding the authority of the Assistant Police Inspector and the validity of the seizure, the court stated that these issues require detailed examination during the trial. At the anticipatory bail stage, the focus remains on the prima facie case, the seriousness of the allegations, and the necessity of custodial interrogation.
The court’s decision aligns with the principle that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy, not to be granted lightly, especially in cases involving serious economic offences. The judgment reflects the judiciary's commitment to ensuring thorough investigation and accountability in cases that affect the public at large.
The rejection of the anticipatory bail application is a significant step in addressing economic offences that undermine regulatory frameworks and public trust. The court's decision underscores the importance of allowing investigating agencies to conduct a free and fair probe to protect public interest.
Bottom Line:
Anticipatory bail rejected in a case involving serious economic offences related to adulteration of petroleum products and layered transactions aimed at evading regulatory scrutiny and causing financial loss to the State.
Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Sections 287, 125, 3(5); Essential Commodities Act, 1955 Sections 3, 7; Petroleum Act, Sections 3, 4, 6, 23(a); Inflammable Substances Act, Section 4; Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 438.
Hetan Ram Gangwani v. State of Maharashtra, (Bombay) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2786118
