Gujarat High Court
Rajusinh Lalsinh Makwana vs State Of Gujarat on 14 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23283/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 23283
of 2025
================================================================
RAJUSINH LALSINH MAKWANA & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Appearance:
MR YASH N NANAVATY(5626) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
KUMAR H TRIVEDI(9364) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR. SOHAM JOSHI APP, for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE UTKARSH THAKORBHAI
DESAI
Date : 14/11/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The applicants who have shown as accused nos. 2 and 3 in the FIR which came to be registered by Himmatnagar A- Division Police Station vide Part A C.R. No. 11209016251152 on 02.10.2025, for the offences alleged to have been committed under Sections 316(5), 61(2) of the BNS, 2023, Section 3 of the GPID Act, 2003, and Sections 21(1)(2)(3) and 22 of The Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Ordinance, 2019, have preferred the present application praying for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023.
2. As mentioned in the FIR, the accused no. 1, Ajaysinh Page 1 of 8 Uploaded by ANIRUDH OJHA(HC02370) on Fri Nov 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 21 23:22:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/23283/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined Rajusinh Makvana, had started two businesses in the name of A.R. Consultancy and A.R. Capital Service, having its office at TF/31, Pratham Square Complex, Shakarijin Road, Himmatnagar, wherein the present applicants were partners, and all three of them were handling the business of both the aforementioned firms from the said office. The main business was pertaining to investment in Bitcoins, and due propaganda for expansion of business by way of advertisements, pamphlets, videos on social media, etc. were carried out. As per the say of the original complainant, the applicants and the co-accused Ajaysinh Rajusinh Makvana would promise the people at large that their companies would be paying more interest than the nationalized banks and other finance companies, and by promising so, would win over their trust.
The original complainant was also lured into the promises given by the applicants and had mortgage gold jewellery with IIFL bank, against which had procured a loan of Rs. 4,50,000/-, had borrowed Rs. 4,00,000/- from his father and had savings to the tune of Rs. 7,50,000/-, and had also procured another loan of Rs. 5,00,000/- from Bank Page 2 of 8 Uploaded by ANIRUDH OJHA(HC02370) on Fri Nov 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 21 23:22:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/23283/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined of Baroda, and thereby had collected Rs. 1,03,45,000/-, which he had deposited with the applicants' firms. The receipts were given by the accused no. 1 to him, however, agreements to that extent were not executed by the accused. Initially, the original complainant had received returns @ 5%, which amounted to Rs. 10 Lakhs, however, from December 2024, he had stopped getting returns. Upon enquiring, he found that the applicants, along with co-accused Ajaysinh Makvana, had got other people invested in their two companies, however had not repaid the amounts to them.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Yash N. Nanavaty for the applicants, who has reiterated the averments of the petition. Mr. Nanavaty has taken the Court through the entire gamut of evidence which has been collected till date, submitting that the applicants neither had any role nor had any say in the business, which was carried out by the accused no. 1.
4. Mr. Nanavaty has also submitted that, the original complainant had mentioned in the FIR itself that he had received returns till December 2024, hence, there was no Page 3 of 8 Uploaded by ANIRUDH OJHA(HC02370) on Fri Nov 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 21 23:22:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/23283/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined intention of committing any breach of trust or cheating the original complainant in any manner. There was no evidence as regards the applicants and the co-accused Ajaysinh Makvana having entered into the criminal conspiracy to dupe the original complainant and others. Mr. Nanavaty has also tried to impress upon the Court that, this is a case based on documentary evidence, for which, the custodial interrogation of the applicants is not necessary, and accordingly, this application should be allowed.
5. Heard learned APP for the respondent - State and learned advocate Mr. Kumar H Trivedi for the original complainant. Both the learned APP and learned advocate Mr. Kumar H Trivedi have submitted that the applicants, along with accused Ajaysinh Makvana had committed a systematic fraud, thereby duping various innocent investors, and though they had promised to give them higher returns, after briefly ensuring that returns would be passed on to the investors, had thereafter stopped paying returns on to investments and had also refused to return the principal amounts, hence, this application should be rejected.
6. At the outset, the applicants were successfully luring the Page 4 of 8 Uploaded by ANIRUDH OJHA(HC02370) on Fri Nov 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 21 23:22:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/23283/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined depositors to deposit Rs. 3,20,05,000/- in the two firms, namely A.R. Consultancy and A.R. Capital Service, whereby the firm A.R. Consultancy was registered in the name of accused Ajaysinh Makvana, whereas the A.R. Capital Service was registered as a partnership firm in the name of accused Ajaysinh Makvana as well as the present applicants.
7. It appears from the investigation papers, that the applicants had also opened offices at Modasa, Khedbrahma and Mehsana and were luring investors by way of false advertisements. It has also come on record that, the offices at these three places were closed and the staff was also laid off. The I.O. was able to recover agreement files of 86 investors from a business premise of the accused no. 1. According to the I.O., the investigation is still at a nascent stage, and they are yet to gather the details of the numbers of investors, as well as the amounts which were invested with the applicants.
8. It is pertinent to observe that in the decision of Kalpeshbhai Dhanjibhai Prajapati vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2025 (0) AIJEL HC 251110, the High Court in para 18 has observed thus:-
Page 5 of 8 Uploaded by ANIRUDH OJHA(HC02370) on Fri Nov 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 21 23:22:44 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/23283/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined "There is no substantial difference between Sections 482 and 483 of BNS, 2023 so far as appreciation of the case as to whether or not a bail is to be granted, is concerned.
However, neither anticipatory bail nor regular bail can be granted as a matter of rule. The anticipatory bail being an extraordinary privilege should be granted only in exceptional cases. The judicial discretion conferred upon the court has to be properly exercised after proper application of mind to decide whether it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence are required to be satisfied and further while granting such relief, the court must record the reasons therefore. Anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has falsely been enroped in the crime and would not misuse his liberty."
9. Thus, to say that there was no intention on part of the applicants to dupe the investors and the case being one of documentary evidence, would be mere eye wash. Anticipatory bail, as has been observed in catena of decisions, being extraordinary remedy which is required to be granted only in exceptional circumstances, wherein the accused would feel that he/she is falsely implicated, then only the court would accede to the request. In the present case, the learned Special Judge of Sabarkantha at Himmatnagar, in his judgment while rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the applicants, has observed in detailed about the offence as well as the reasons to deny Page 6 of 8 Uploaded by ANIRUDH OJHA(HC02370) on Fri Nov 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 21 23:22:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/23283/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined anticipatory bail to the applicants. The affidavit of the I.O., which was also submitted before the Competent Court, dwells at length as regards the modus operandi of the applicants along with co-accused no. 1, in commission of the crime. When the misappropriation is to the tune of crores of rupees, wherein innocent investors are at receiving end who while having faith and trust in the applicants had invested their hard-earned money and lifetime savings are stranded without any clue as to how, when and how much amounts would be returned to them, is the big question to which this Court cannot be oblivious to.
10. It would be too early at this juncture to conclude that, the offence alleged to have been committed by the applicants is not one wherein, custodial interrogation would not be required. The learned Special Judge had mindfully taken refuge in the observations of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Teesta Atul Setalvad Vs State of Gujarat in Criminal Misc. Application (for Anticipatory Bail) No. 4677/2014 which read thus ;
"It is at that stage and in such circumstances that Page 7 of 8 Uploaded by ANIRUDH OJHA(HC02370) on Fri Nov 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 21 23:22:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/23283/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined the custodial interrogation becomes a very important factor.
Custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation oriented than questioning a suspect who is well ensconced with a favorable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this effective interrogation of suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre-arrest bail during the time he interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third-degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The court has to presume that responsible Police Officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders. (see State Rep. by the C.B.I. v. Anil Sharma, (1997)7 SCC 187."
11. In view of the forgoing discussion, the present application seeking anticipatory bail is hereby rejected.
12. Needless to say, that the observations made herein above would be limited to the outcome of the present application only, and shall not influence any other proceedings which may or would arise from the impugned FIR.
(UTKARSH THAKORBHAI DESAI, J) ANIRUDH OJHA Page 8 of 8 Uploaded by ANIRUDH OJHA(HC02370) on Fri Nov 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 21 23:22:44 IST 2025