Delhi High Court denies pre-arrest bail to mom, son over Rs 400 crore fraud

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has refused to grant anticipatory bail to two accused in an alleged Rs 400 crore financial fraud case, saying such offences were very serious to the commercial and economic world and required scrutiny with "utmost seriousness".

Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma dismissed the anticipatory bail plea of a mother-son duo, Charu and Aadhar Khera, in an FIR registered by Delhi Police's economic offences wing in 2022, underscoring the requirement of a sustained custodial interrogation.

"Such kind of offences are very serious to the commercial and economic world and are required to be seen with the utmost seriousness. The accused persons are in such close relations that the possibility of them not giving correct information, to save each other cannot be brushed aside," it said on February 6.

The court went on to add, "Conspiracies are hatched and executed in the dark. It is very difficult to get direct evidence in the conspiracies and more difficult, when the alleged accused persons are so closely related to each other. The case involves financial transactions and in such a case, the sustained custodial interrogation seems to be the most vital option." The allegations of the prosecution, said the court, against Aadhar Khera and Charu Khera were "grave" and involved a "well-orchestrated financial fraud" resulting in he misappropriation of substantial sums of money.

"The facts in the present case are alarming in nature," it added.

The police alleged Ajay Khera and his wife Charu aside from other family members were at the centre of a complex financial fraud.

The FIR was registered on the complaint of the director of Seagull Maritime Agencies Pvt Ltd, who claimed Ajay and his other son Siddharth Khera, in connivance with others, fraudulently siphoned off business and funds from Seagull to their newly incorporated entities — Azure Freight & Logistics LLP and Azure International LLC.

The complainant said the offences in the present case were committed over multiple jurisdictions through cross-border transactions, resulting in economic offences amounting to approximately Rs 400 crore.

The court said though it was fully conscious that a person was presumed innocent till held guilty, at the same time, the interest of the complainant or the prosecution could not be ignored outrightly.

The claim of the present applicants that they were merely signatories and did not play any active role could not be accepted on its face value in the view of the material available on record, the court said.

The applicants denied the allegations.