MUMBAI: A special court under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (MPID) Act recently denied bail to Umesh Ramdhan Raypure, the proprietor of an unregistered investment firm through which he allegedly duped 91 investors of over ₹3.7 crore by luring them with fraudulent high-return schemes.
Special judge R K Deshpande on October 18 dismissed Raypure’s plea for regular bail, observing that charges have been framed against him already and there was “no change in circumstances” warranting reconsideration of bail.
According to the prosecution, between 2019 and 2022, the accused induced people to invest through his Andheri-based firm, Siddharth Profit House, and promised daily returns of 1 to 1.5%. He also offered loans covering 70% of the cost of a house. Ninety-one people invested ₹3,70,30,000 and received returns only in the initial few months. From October 2022 onwards, most stopped receiving profits nor their principal amounts. The court also noted that Raypure had created WhatsApp groups where he sent messages explaining the benefits of various investment schemes his firm floated. “Some of the employees of Airport Authority of India have also invested their money in the Ponzi scheme of the accused and have suffered loss,” the court said.
The Mumbai Police’s Economic Offences Wing (EOW) arrested Raypure in January 2024 for offences punishable under Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust), 409 (criminal breach of trust by a banker/merchant) and 420 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, read with relevant sections of the MPID Act. Investigators found that Raypure had been diverting investors’ funds to the stock market by trading through IIFL Securities Ltd. He had invested over ₹4.51 crore and withdrawn ₹2.70 crore. The order records that his company “had no permission from the Reserve Bank of India to invest in shares” and that the reinvestment was illegal.
In his defence, Raypure claimed that all transactions were legitimate and that the investors were fully informed about the risks. His counsel argued that his arrest was illegal due to non-compliance with Section 50 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which mandates informing an arrested person of the grounds of arrest.
Rejecting this contention, the court held that the investigating officer had complied with it and provided details about the arrest to his mother, Ratnamala Ramdhan Raypure.