Mumbai: The special MPID court has rejected the bail plea of Naeem Sarvar Musa Anjum alias Nayeem Sarwar Moosa Anjum, a key accused in the alleged ₹61.10 crore Dream Sunshine Digital Pvt Ltd investment fraud, in which more than 10,000 investors were promised attractive returns.Designated MPID Judge Vikram R. Jagdale rejected Anjum’s bail plea after the prosecution strongly opposed his bail, claiming that Anjum, along with company directors Amanat Ali Ansari and Abdul Rahim Ansari and other co-accused, induced investors to invest in schemes floated by Dream Sunshine Digital Pvt Ltd by promising attractive returns. The EOW had in March this year registered an offence an offence of cheating against Amanat Ansari and his partners, namely Rahim Ansari, Navajis Ansari, Naeem Sarvar and Yogini Shikhe, who conspired with each other and induced the complainant and his relatives to invest in their business of mineral water, sugar, dates and construction, promising 5% returns and high profits and duped them. Police alleged that 2,907 investors were cheated of over ₹61.10 crore.Seeking bail, Anjum claimed he was merely an agent and investor who introduced prospective investors to the company directors. He contended that he and his family had invested ₹1.47 crore in the company and had no role in its day-to-day affairs. The defence also argued that only 22 out of more than 150 witnesses had made allegations against him and offered to repay investors through funds lying in his frozen bank accounts.Opposing the plea, on behalf of investors advocates Shane Ilahi Karim Pathan, Fazal Shaikh and Shoaib Shaikh. and the police stated that over 10,000 investors had been affected and the investigation was still expanding as more victims continued to come forward. Police alleged that Anjum maintained seven bank accounts through which he received approximately ₹25.54 crore between 2016 and 2026 before transferring funds to the main accused and their relatives. The agency further claimed that the prime accused remain absconding and that Anjum had not cooperated with the investigation.The court observed that the allegations involved a large-scale financial scheme affecting thousands of investors and noted the applicant’s alleged nexus with the absconding directors. Holding that there was a possibility of witness tampering and interference with the ongoing investigation, the court ruled that granting bail at this stage could adversely affect both the criminal proceedings and the recovery process under the MPID Act. The court said considering the magnitude of the alleged fraud, the court rejected Anjum’s bail application.
