Supreme Court Protects Elderly Victim’s Interests in Fraud-Induced Bail Case.


06 November 2025 Bail and Antcipatory Bail >> Criminal Law   |   Special Leave Petition >> Criminal Law   |   Default or Fraud >> Debt Recovery  

A Special Leave Petition arising out of a Bombay High Court order granting bail to an accused who allegedly committed fraud on a 90-year-old woman and caused her a loss of a considerable amount of money was heard by the Supreme Court of India on November 6, 2025. In Saroja Rajan v. Bala Raman Krishnan & Anr., SLP (Crl.) No. 14014 of 2025, a Bench comprising Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra heard the case.

The petitioner, Smt. Saroja Rajan, contended that the High Court's order granting bail to the respondent was unsustainable in view of the gravity of the allegations. It was alleged that the accused had gained her trust and induced her to part with approximately Rs. 12.5 crores under the guise of investment or business collaboration. The prosecution and the State of Maharashtra supported the petitioner's contention that the act amounted to an egregious breach of trust, considering her advanced age and vulnerability.

 

 

The counsel for the accused during the hearing submitted that his client was willing to return the entire amount but needed a period of one and a half years. The Bench was unsatisfied with this and pressed for a reasonable timeline. On further instructions from his client, the counsel undertook that full money would be returned within six months while assuring the Court that an initial payment of Rs. 2 crore would be made before the next listing on December 10, 2025.

While the Supreme Court did not disturb the existing bail order at this stage, it balanced equity with compassion by recording the respondent's undertaking to pay. It directed the filing of an affidavit confirming proof of payment before the next hearing and thus indicated that the Court intended to ensure restitution to the victim without delay. This order reveals how the Court, in recent times, has handled cases of financial exploitation of senior citizens. It emphasizes that as much as bail jurisprudence may lean toward liberty, the rights and dignity of vulnerable individuals should not be compromised. 

The case will be taken up again next month to determine whether the respondent’s undertaking has been complied with, at a critical juncture of criminal law, equity, and social justice principles.