Gujarat High Court
Maulik Nitikumar Shah vs State Of Gujarat on 21 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7683/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 7683
of 2026
==========================================================
MAULIK NITIKUMAR SHAH
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RAJESH K KANANI(2157) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. SAMIP R. KANANI(18625) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR YUVRAJ BRAHMBHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER
Date : 21/04/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( for short, "BNSS"), the applicant has prayed for anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11191037240945 of 2025, registered with the Odhav Police Station, Ahmedabad City, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 120B and 506(1) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Gujarat Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act.
2. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule for respondent - State of Gujarat.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that Page 1 of 8 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:39:47 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7683/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026 undefined the nature of allegations are such that custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. It is further submitted that the applicant will keep himself available during the course of investigation and trial also and will not flee from justice. He mainly argued that the present applicant was not shown as an accused in the FIR; no role was attributed to him and no notice was served to the applicant nor the applicant was called upon for the purpose of investigation and surprisingly, he was shown as accused in Column No.2 in the charge- sheet, which came to be filed against the co-accused viz., Sweety Maulik Shah, who is a wife of the applicant. It has also been argued that for the transaction of the year 2023, FIR is filed in May, 2025, therefore, there is unexplained delay of more than two years in filing the FIR and the applicant is neither a Partner nor a Director nor a Promoter nor in any manner connected or having authority in the management or affairs of the entities, viz., `En Life Capsure LLP' and `Quick Start 24 Group'; that there is no material on record to show that any amount has been received by the applicant or that he has derived any wrongful gain. 3.1 The learned advocate for the applicant further states that the applicant shall abide by all the conditions that may be imposed while granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. Accordingly, it is urged that this application may Page 2 of 8 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:39:47 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7683/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026 undefined be allowed and to grant the anticipatory bail to the applicant.
4. As against this, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence and requested not to entertain this application. It is submitted that the report is filed on 03.06.2025 by the investigating officer for addition of Section 409 of the IPC, which came to be allowed and the name of the present applicant was not stated and in another report, which was filed on 18.,6.2025 by the investigating officer for addition of Sections 3 and 4 of the GPID Act also, the name of the present applicant was not stated, but the main accused i.e. Sweety Maulik Shah, who is a wife of the applicant, is stated. It is also submitted that present applicant has acted as an agent and for the same, the commission of Rs.4,31,001/- has been received by the accused and the other accused - Pratik Shah happens to be the brother-in-law of the applicant. It is further submits that from the final forensic audit report, it transpires that in the summary of the receipts and payments transactions, the name of the accused is also shown. It is, therefore, prayed to reject this application.
Page 3 of 8 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:39:47 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7683/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026 undefined
5. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and perusing the papers available on record, it is incumbent upon the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously, cautiously and strictly in compliance with the basic principles laid down in plethora of decisions of the Apex Court on the point. It is well settled that, among other circumstances, the factors to be borne in mind while considering an application for bail are (i) the nature and gravity of the accusation; (ii) the antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether he has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence; (iii) the possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; and (iv) where the accusation has been made with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by having him so arrested. Though, at the stage of granting bail, an elaborate examination of evidence and detailed reasons touching the merits of the case, which may prejudice the case of accused, should be avoided, however, following aspects have been taken into consideration :
a) Prima facie, there is no role of the applicant;
b) The applicant has no past antecedents;
c) The learned advocate for the applicant has assured that the applicant will not flee from justice and would be available during Page 4 of 8 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:39:47 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7683/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026 undefined investigation as well as the trial.
d) Offence is not punishable with life
imprisonment or death penalty;
e) Nothing is required to be recovered or
discovered from the applicant;
f) No case for custodial interrogation is made
out;
g) Even considering the decisions in the case of
Naim Ahamed vs. State NCT of Delhi
reported in 2023 SCC OnLine (SC) 89 as
well as unreported decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Ravindra Umaley vs. The State of Maharashtra;
5.1 Further, the fact remains that the report was filed on 03.06.2025 by the investigating officer for addition of Section 409 of the IPC, which does not state the name of the present applicant as an accused and another report was filed by the investigating officer for addition of Sections 3 and 4 of the GPID Act, which came to be allowed and it also does not state the name of the accused, but the charge- sheet dated 28.08.2025 is taken into consideration, no distinct role of the applicant is stated in the charge-sheet. In the charge-sheet, the only role attributed to the present applicant is being an agent, but no specific role is attributed to the Page 5 of 8 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:39:47 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7683/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026 undefined present applicant; that the only role attributed to the applicant is being a Manager of Qsmart Retail Ltd. and also being a Financial Advisor in Enlife Multitrade Pvt. Ltd.
6. Considering the aforesaid aspects and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others, reported in (2011) 1 SCC 6941, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Others, reported in (1980) 2 SCC 665 and also the decision in the case of Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Court is inclined to allow the present application.
7. In the result, this application is allowed by directing that in the event of arrest/ appearance of the applicant in connection with the above-referred FIR, the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions that the applicant ;
(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make available for interrogation whenever required; Page 6 of 8 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:39:47 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7683/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026 undefined
(b) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;
(c) shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;
(d) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 30.04.2026 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;
(e) shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the investigating officer and the court concerned and shall not change residence till the final disposal of the case till further orders;
(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the Court and if having passport shall deposit the same before the trial Court within a week;
(g) It is open to the police or the investigating agency to move the learned trial Court for a direction under Section 483(2) of the BNSS to arrest the accused, in Page 7 of 8 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:39:47 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7683/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026 undefined the event of violation of any term, such as absconding, non-cooperating during investigation, evasion, intimidation or inducement to witnesses with a view to influence outcome of the investigation or trial, etc. 7.1 At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court while considering the bail application.
8. It is made clear that this order of anticipatory bail does not in any manner limit or restrict the rights or duties of the police or investigative agency to investigate into the charges against the applicant who is granted pre-arrest bail.
9. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
(SANJEEV J.THAKER,J) M.H. DAVE/9 Page 8 of 8 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:39:47 IST 2026