ORDER : 1. These applications for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. have been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. Nos.142/2022 and 164/2022 registered at Police Station Bhagat Ki Kothi, District Jodhpur for the offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 and 120B IPC. 2. As per prosecution story, the petitioner and his wife were directors in Bombay Solar and Wind Power Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘company’) which was an impanelled vendor for installing solar plants under supervision of Rajasthan Renewal Energy Corporation Limited (for short ‘Corporation’). 3. The petitioner assured the complainant and many other persons who were interested in installation of solar energy plants on rooftops of their houses that since his company is an impanelled vendor of RRPCL, they would be given subsidies. That in order to take benefit of the subsidy scheme floated by the Corporation, they will have to deposit 70% of the cost of the solar plant to the company while the remaining 30% shall be paid to the company by the Corporation. Believing upon the false assurance given by the petitioner, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.1,83,020/- through cheque No.14228 dated 29.06.2021, in the name of the petitioner’s company. However, even after encashing the cheque, the company did not install solar plant despite commitment given by the company to the complainant through a written contract. 4. As per prosecution, in like manner, amount was collected by the company from large number of people/prospective customers and even after collecting the amounts, solar plants were not installed. A fraud of Rs.5,38,72,399/- was committed. The details of the FIRs lodged against petitioner are as under:- dz la- iz-lw-fj- la[;k iqfyl Fkkuk /kkjk orZeku fLFkfr 1- 91/24.06.2022 [kkaMk Qylk 420] 406] 120] 120[k Hkk-n-l- yafcr 2. 304/12.09.2022 cukM+ 420] 406 Hkk-n-l- yafcr 3. 500/27.08.2022 egkeafnj 420] 406] 467] 468] 120] 120[k Hkk-n-l- yafcr 4. 210/08.05.2022 mn;eafnj 420] 406] 120[k Hkk-n-l- yafcr 5. 107/06.06.2022 ,;jiksVZ 420] 406] 120[k Hkk-n-l- yafcr 6. 271/07.09.2022 e.Mksj 420] 406] 120[k Hkk-n-l- yafcr 7. 280/09.12.2002 e.Mksj 420] 406] 120[k Hkk-n-l- yafcr 8. 129/13.07.2022 Hkxr dh dksBh 420] 406] 467] 478] 120[k Hkk-n-l- yafcr 9. 142/02.08.2022 Hkxr dh dksBh 420] 406] Hkk-n-l- yafcr 10. 164/06.09.2022 Hkxr dh dksBh 420] 406] Hkk-n-l- yafcr 11. 233/29.11.2022 Hkxr dh dksBh 420] 406] 120[k Hkk-n-l- yafcr 12. 166/05.06.2022 nsouxj 420] 406 Hkk-n-l- yafcr 13. 280/09.12.2002 e.Mksj 420] 406] 120[k Hkk-n-l- yafcr 8. 129/13.07.2022 Hkxr dh dksBh 420] 406] 467] 478] 120[k Hkk-n-l- yafcr 9. 142/02.08.2022 Hkxr dh dksBh 420] 406] Hkk-n-l- yafcr 10. 164/06.09.2022 Hkxr dh dksBh 420] 406] Hkk-n-l- yafcr 11. 233/29.11.2022 Hkxr dh dksBh 420] 406] 120[k Hkk-n-l- yafcr 12. 166/05.06.2022 nsouxj 420] 406 Hkk-n-l- yafcr 13. 201/07.09.2022 izrkiuxj 420] 406] 120[k Hkk-n-l- yafcr 14. 214/19.09.2022 izrkiuxj 420] 406] 120[k Hkk-n-l- yafcr 15. 251/03.08.2022 nsouxj 420] 406] 120[k Hkk-n-l- yafcr 16. 297/07.09.2022 nsouxj 420] 406] Hkk-n-l- yafcr 17. 298/07.09.2022 nsouxj 420] 406] Hkk-n-l- yafcr 18. 302/08.09.2022 nsouxj 420] 406] Hkk-n-l- yafcr 19. 303/08.09.2022 nsouxj 420] 406] Hkk-n-l- yafcr 20. 308.10.09.2022 nsouxj 420] 406] Hkk-n-l- yafcr 21. 317/17.09.2022 nsouxj 420] 406] Hkk-n-l- yafcr 22. 276/11.10.2022 nsouxj 420] 406] Hkk-n-l- yafcr 23. 359/10.10.2022 nsouxj 420] 406] Hkk-n-l- yafcr 24. 380/01.11.2022 nsouxj 420] 406] Hkk-n-l- yafcr 25. 230/08.11.2022 jktho xka/kh uxj 420] 406] Hkk-n-l- yafcr 26. 627/21.10.2022 dqM+h Hkxrkluh 420] 406] Hkk-n-l- yafcr 27. 232/10.11.2022 jktho xka/kh uxj 420] 406] Hkk-n-l- yafcr 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner on last occasion when the instant matter was reserved by this Court on 11.05.2023, had submitted that the petitioner is desirous and has shown his willingness to refund the amount collected by him as advance from consumers/prospective customers for installation of solar plants. 6. For the settlement of accounts/ refund of money, two proposals were submitted by the counsel, which had been made part of the order dated 16.05.2023 passed by this Court and reads as follows:- “Proposal No. 1. 1. Rajasthan High Court directs Rajasthan Renewable Energy Corporation Limited (RRECL) (Nodal Agency for the Scheme) to open an Escrow Account for the amount Rs. 99 lakhs (approx.) as withheld on the grievances of the customers/complainants, same has been commissioned for the projects completed by the petitioner. 2. Petitioner would make available all the details i.e. name of customers/complainants. account details, repayment amount. FLR details, etc., to RRECL after which RRECL would issue a certificate/undertaking /compliance receipt regarding the payment made to the customers/complainant, and certifies that grievances of the complainant customers have been redressed. 3. 2. Petitioner would make available all the details i.e. name of customers/complainants. account details, repayment amount. FLR details, etc., to RRECL after which RRECL would issue a certificate/undertaking /compliance receipt regarding the payment made to the customers/complainant, and certifies that grievances of the complainant customers have been redressed. 3. That petitioner be enlarged on bail in all the cases on the filing of Bail application u/s 437 Cr.P.C. with the condition in a time period of 4 to 6 months petitioner would furnish a certificate/undertaking/compliance receipt issued by RRECL to the concerned trial court, may impose other conditions to secure his presence or fulfill the compliance of Hon'ble High Court order, in case of failure, bail became automatically rejected. 4. The certificate/undertaking/compliance receipt to become proof of settlement of the dispute, which required to be presented before the trial court along with an application for the compounding of the offence, and the trial court after examining all the aspects of the matter would close the proceedings against the petitioner. 5. That amount paid to the customer is required to be paid in two instalments of 50%, as some of the customers/complainants received solar plates/ inverters/batteries/stands, which requires to be settled with the customers to save petitioners from monetary loss, under the supervision of concern trial court, as some of the customers/complainants filed FIR with an ulterior motive to harass petitioners instead of settlement of the dispute amicably. 6. That customers/complainants would withdraw all the civil as well as criminal cases filed against petitioners or his family members. 7. That it is pertinent to mention here that RRECL is ready to resolve the dispute with the permission of the Hon'ble Court. Proposal no. 2. 1. That all the Bank Accounts of the petitioner have been freezed, so all the funds of the petitioner became immobilized, first requires to unfreeze them by directing the concerned trial court, so that the petitioner could raise funds to settle the dispute. 2. That petitioner be enlarged on conditional bail by making an undertaking to redress the grievances of the customers/complainants with in time period of 4 to 6 months. 3 An amount of Rs 99 Lakhs has been withheld by RRECL, except to this petitioner also has gold amounted to Rs. 2. That petitioner be enlarged on conditional bail by making an undertaking to redress the grievances of the customers/complainants with in time period of 4 to 6 months. 3 An amount of Rs 99 Lakhs has been withheld by RRECL, except to this petitioner also has gold amounted to Rs. 75,00,000/- (which mortgaged with Bank) for Rs.32,00,000/- and other items through which he could raise funds, petitioner would make payment to the customers/complainants on a settlement deed, verified by concern trial court, subject to the claims raised by petitioner, as some of the customers/complainants have solar plates/batteries/ Inverters/ stand, etc which require to be determined by the concern trial court. 4. In case the petitioner is not able to keep his promise his conditional bail would require to be cancelled.” 7. When the matter was taken up by this Court for hearing on 03.08.2023, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner in order to settle the dispute with the complainants of various FIRs, has voluntarily submitted an undertaking before this Court, disclosing his willingness to refund the outstanding amount of the complainants, in case his bank accounts are ordered to be unfreezed by this Court. 8. The undertaking voluntarily submitted by the petitioner, reads as under:- “UNDERTAKING I, Dharmendra Pawar, S/o Shri Kune Singh Ji, aged about 58 years, resident of Villa No.32, Nandanvan Greens, Kheme Ka Kuan, Jodhpur at present lodged at Central Jail, Jodhpur do hereby state on oath as under:- 1. I state that an FIR bearing no.164/2022 has been registered against me at P.S. Bhagat Ki Kothi under the Section 420, 406 IPC. 2. I state that I instructed my counsel to give undertaking before the Hon’ble Court showing my willingness to settle the outstanding of the complainant within a period of 90 days from the date of unfreezing of my bank accounts, which are seized by the order of Investigating officer. 3. I state that following bank accounts and gold loan accounts have funds available in them, which are freezed by the bank authorities under the order of the Investigating Officer:- Name of the Bank and Account Details Available balance HDFC Bank Ltd.: 1. Narpat Nagar, Pal Road, Jodhpur. 3. I state that following bank accounts and gold loan accounts have funds available in them, which are freezed by the bank authorities under the order of the Investigating Officer:- Name of the Bank and Account Details Available balance HDFC Bank Ltd.: 1. Narpat Nagar, Pal Road, Jodhpur. Name of Account Holder: M/s. HOLYSUN ENERGY Account No.50200045536757 Type of Account – Current A/c Rs.5,24,049.6 4/- Gold Loan Account: ICICI Bank, Jaljog Circle, Jodhpur Account ID 016705011805 Gold weight: 624gms., value – 34,96,896.00 Dr. Bal. 22,45,540.83 Name of Account Holder– Shalini Dharmendra Pawar Rs.12,51,355. 17/- Gold Loan Account : ICICI Bank, Jaljog Circle, Jodhpur. Account ID 016705011806 Gold weight: 427 gms., value – 23,92,908.00 Dr. Bal. 14,54,260.07 Name of Account Holder – Dharmendra Pawar Rs.9,38,647.93/- Funds kept on HOLD by RRECL Rs.95,70,948. 00/- Total Rs.1,22,83,00 0.70/- 4. I state that the outstanding amount of the complainant in this FIR No.164/2022 is 1,83,020.00, which would be paid by me within 90 days in two equal installments. 5. I state that I have no objection if the Hon’ble High Court may direct the police authorities to instruct the concerned bank authorities to release an amount of Rs.91,510.00 towards the first installment of the entire outstanding of the complainant. 6. I state that Hon’ble Court may direct the complainant to give his bank details to the Investigating Officer, who would instruct the concerned bank to release the amount of Rs.91,510.00 which would be paid directly in the bank account of the complainant. 7. I state that the second installment of the entire outstanding shall be paid within 60 dyas from the date of release of first installment. The petitioner would undertaking a survey to identify various parts installed at the site of various complainants and the corresponding amount of the parts shall be adjusted against their payment of second installment. 8. I state that I shall get an approval on the amount of second installment after making necessary adjustments from the complainant. Upon his consent, the police authorities may direct the concerned bank to release the agreed amount of second installment and deposit the same in the bank account of the complainant. 9. I state that I undertake to settle all the outstanding customers from the amount of subsidy to be received by me from RRECL and will take no objection from those customers. 10. 9. I state that I undertake to settle all the outstanding customers from the amount of subsidy to be received by me from RRECL and will take no objection from those customers. 10. I state that I undertake before the Hon’ble Court that the bail granted to me pursuant to this undertaking conditional one and subject to the conditions agreed by me in this undertaking, which may kindly be taken on record and kindly be made part of the bail order. 11. I state that I undertake to surrender my passport before the police authorities as directed by the Hon’ble High Court and I undertake not to go out of country till the proceedings are finally concluded. 12. I state that I undertake to obey and abide by any and all conditions as given by the Hon’ble High Court pursuant to the aforesaid undertaking. I undertake as stated above. Dated:- 19.07.23 Dharmendra Pawar S/o Sh. Kune Singh Ji At present lodged at Central Jail, Jodhpur” 9. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. However, learned counsel for the complainant submitted that in view of the fact that the petitioner has shown his willingness to settle/refund the amount outstanding, he has no objection, in case, the petitioner is enlarged on bail. 10. Learned counsel for the complainant placed reliance on judgment dated 04th July 2023, rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar vs. State of NCT of Delhi [SLP (Crl.) No.2358 of 2021]. 11. The relevant para of the judgment is reproduced herein below for ready reference of the Court:- “…However, inclusion of a condition for payment of money by the applicant for bail tends to create an impression that bail could be secured by depositing money alleged to have been cheated. That is really not the purpose and intent of the provisions for grant of bail. We may, however, not be understood to have laid down the law that in no case should willingness to make payment/deposit by the accused be considered before grant of an order for bail. That is really not the purpose and intent of the provisions for grant of bail. We may, however, not be understood to have laid down the law that in no case should willingness to make payment/deposit by the accused be considered before grant of an order for bail. In exceptional cases such as where an allegation of misappropriation of public money by the accused is levelled and the accused while seeking indulgence of the court to have his liberty secured/restored volunteers to account for the whole or any part of the public money allegedly misappropriated by him, it would be open to the concerned court to consider whether in the larger public interest the money misappropriated should be allowed to be deposited before the application for anticipatory bail/bail is taken up for final consideration. After all, no court should be averse to putting public money back in the system if the situation is conducive therefor. We are minded to think that this approach would be in the larger interest of the community. However, such an approach would not be warranted in cases of private disputes where private parties complain of their money being involved in the offence of cheating.” 12. Having gone through the FIR, challan papers submitted by the investigating agency before competent criminal court, police investigation report produced before this Court (C.O. Diary), this Court finds that allegation against the present petitioner is of committing financial fraud of high magnitude involving huge public money. This Court prima facie finds that huge public money is involved in the present case and the petitioner has shown his willingness to refund/ settle/ deposit outstanding money of the complainant within 90 days of grant of bail by this Court, subject to the condition that his bank accounts freezed by the bank authorities under the orders of Investigating Officer are unfreezed. 13. This Court keeping in view the larger public interest deems it appropriate to extend an opportunity to the petitioner to refund the money allegedly taken by him from large number of people/ prospective customers and therefore, is inclined to grant interim bail to the petitioner for a period of 100 days. 14. 13. This Court keeping in view the larger public interest deems it appropriate to extend an opportunity to the petitioner to refund the money allegedly taken by him from large number of people/ prospective customers and therefore, is inclined to grant interim bail to the petitioner for a period of 100 days. 14. Accordingly, instead of granting regular bail to the petitioner, this Court deems it appropriate to grant interim bail to the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for a period of 100 days and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner -Dharmendra Panwar S/o Shri Kuny Singh shall be enlarged on interim bail in connection with F.I.R. Nos.142/2022 and 164/2022 registered at Police Station Bhagat Ki Kothi, District Jodhpur, subject to the condition that he furnishes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (out of which one surety will be a close relative of the petitioner and resident of Jodhpur city) each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his surrender on completion of 100 days period from the date of his actual release. 15. This Court is not supposed to impose conditions upon the petitioner while granting bail but keeping in view the law laid down in the case of Ramesh Kumar (supra) and looking to the seriousness of allegations against the petitioner, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail subject to the condition that he shall:- a. not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse the liberty b. not act in a manner prejudice to the interest of prosecution c. surrender passport to the competent criminal court within a week. d. not leave the State of Rajasthan without prior permission of competent criminal court. e. mark presence before court concerned as may be directed and also mark presence at the concerned police station every month on 1st Monday of English Calendar Month from 11 am to 1pm. f. not tamper with evidence, nor act in breach of law nor intimidate any witness directly or indirectly. 16. This Court in order to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of process of law deems it just and proper to exercise inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC. f. not tamper with evidence, nor act in breach of law nor intimidate any witness directly or indirectly. 16. This Court in order to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of process of law deems it just and proper to exercise inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC. Consequently, it is directed that appropriate orders for unfreezing of the bank accounts will be issued by the competent authorities/ Investigating Officer within a period of three days of this order. 17. The petitioner immediately after unfreezing of his accounts, will start making repayment if the money due to the complainant in terms of the undertaking submitted by him before this Court. The undertaking submitted by the petitioner is ordered to be made part of this order. 18. List the matter on 20th November 2023, on that date, Investigating Officer shall remain present before this court along with latest factual report. 19. It is further made clear that non-adherence of the various conditions imposed vide this order and enumerated in the undertaking will entitle complainant- Investigating Officer to move appropriate application seeking cancellation of the present bail application.