Mumbai: The special court for Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (MPID) has refused to grant anticipatory bail to 60-year-old advocate, Ramji Gupta, booked for abetment of preparation of forged documents in a case of misappropriation of funds of a trust. Special judge NG Shukla noted that Gupta has been practicing as a Notary for the past 30 years and “hence more care and integrity were expected” of him.
About The Case
As per the case lodged by the Economic Offences Wing, Shamsher Talwar, a former trustee of Shri Sanatan Dharma Sabha Geeta Bhavan Hari Mandir Trust, and his wife Aditi were booked for alleged misappropriation of funds to the tune of Rs 66.86 lakh. It is alleged that a plot was given to the trust for a school and allied purposes. However, without permission of the trustees, a turf ground was created, for which the couple allegedly collected donations in cash and online.
Allegation Made By EOW
The EOW alleged that the funds were used for a personal flat. During the probe, Talwar allegedly prepared a ‘conducting agreement’ regarding the turf’s use. The prosecution claimed that it was signed by the trust’s chairman, Gulshan Vijan, and notarised by Gupta on July 11, 2020, in a notary register. However, Vijan was admitted to a hospital on July 8 after an accidental fall, had a hip replacement on July 20 and died on August 16 that year.
It was contended that it was improbable that he could have reached Gupta’s office to sign the agreement and in the notary register, to which the court agreed. The prosecution argued that the agreement was allegedly executed on March 20, 2020, and notarised only four months later. These circumstances create suspicion against Gupta. Gupta, on the other hand, denied either executing or being involved in the forgery of the agreement. His lawyer said he has appeared in the EOW office 10 times and has cooperated with the probe.
The court also noted that Gupta was also booked for forging a Will, in a case registered with the Mapusa police in Goa. It added that the allegations are not mere suspicion but there was forgery of the agreement as well as impersonation in the notary register.
