The police custody of Ullas Prabhakar, an accused in the multicrore Stock Guru scam case, was today extended by a court here after Delhi Police said he has to be taken to Goa, Mumbai and Ratnagiri to recover documents, hard disks and other evidence.
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Pulastya Pramachala extended Ullas' police custody till November 24 while his wife and co-accused Raksha alias Priyanka was remanded in judicial custody till November 30.
While remanding Raksha in judicial custody, the court allowed her to take along her eight-month-old daughter in jail keeping in view the "peculiar age" of the child and her "requirement of care to be taken by the mother."
The duo were produced before the court by the Economic Offences Wing (EoW) of Delhi Police.
The Investigating Officer of the case, Inspector Raj Kumar told the court that Ullas has to be taken to Mumbai, Goa and Ratnagiri to recover various property-related documents, bank accounts, laptops, hard disk containing information about the investors, wrist watches and other evidence at his instance.
He also told the court that the arrested couple was produced before a magisterial court on November 11, which granted Ullas' police custody till November 21 but since he has to be taken to various places and travelling would consume a lot of time, the custody needed to be further extended.
"From the case of the prosecution, it is revealed that the charges against accused persons are in respect of fraud pertaining to large number of investors.
"In these circumstances, keeping in view the distance of the places sought to be visited by the IO along with the accused for purpose of making recoveries in this case, accused Ulhas Prabhakar is remanded in police custody up to November 24," the court said.
Meanwhile, Ulhas' mother Kamal Kher also appeared before the court along with the couple's two other minor daughters, aged three and six years, seeking their custody from the court.
The children were brought here by the Delhi Police since at the time of arrest of the couple, no other family member was present to take the custody of the minors, necessitating the need for