Gujarat High Court
Vandanaben D/O Ajmalbhai Solanki vs State Of Gujarat on 15 September, 2023
Bench: Nirzar S. Desai
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14872/2023 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 14872 of 2023
==========================================================
VANDANABEN D/O AJMALBHAI SOLANKI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS.KHUSHBOO V MALKAN(5932) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
JIGNESHKUMAR M NAYAK(8558) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR JK SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 15/09/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of this application under Section 439 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant
is seeking regular bail in connection with the
offence registered as C.R.No.11205013230270 of 2023
registered with Mankuva Police Station, District
Kachchh-Bhuj for the offences punishable under
Sections 406, 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860.
2. As per the FIR by one Mr. Khimji Bhanji Matang,
he has stated that he is serving as electrician in
Army and that the present applicant, who is the
Director of a company viz. Enlighten World is running
a Trust for the development of people belonging to
Scheduled Caste and if someone invests money in that
Trust, the money is utilized for helping the people
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14872/2023 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2023
undefined
belonging to Scheduled Tribes and the same is also
invested in real estate and stock market and whatever
profit that the company may earn, some assured return
at the rate of 3% per month is given. Ultimately, the
first informant was introduced to the present
applicant and her partner Amar Makwana. Thereafter,
the first informant invested a sum of Rs.11 lakh
initially and thereafter on various occasions
invested a total sum of Rs.25 lakh and by way of a
notarized document, the present applicant assured him
to pay 3% interest per month i.e. Rs.75,000/- per
month. It was also promised to the first informant
that if the first informant keeps the amount of
interest deposited with the present applicant, he
will be provided with the plot in the smart city,
Dholera. However, despite long time having been
passed, as the first informant did not receive any
interest on the amount invested nor there were any
talks about providing a plot to him, he tried to
contact the present applicant but she did not give
amount of interest as promised, and therefore, the
first informant asked her to return the invested
amount of Rs.25 lakh. The present applicant promised
him to return the amount of Rs.25 lakh after 45 days
but even after 45 days, the aforesaid amount was not
returned to the first informant. Ultimately, the
applicant stopped receiving the phone calls from the
first informant and, therefore, the first informant
preferred an application before Mankuva Police
Station and there it was decided between the first
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14872/2023 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2023
undefined
informant, present applicant and Amar Makwana that
out of Rs.25 lakh, by the end of February, 2023, the
first informant would be paid Rs.10 lakh and
remaining Rs.15 lakh would be paid within a period of
three months thereafter and post dated cheques were
also given to the first informant. However, only one
cheque was cleared and two cheques were bounced and
therefore the FIR is registered against the present
applicant.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Malkan for the applicant
made following submissions:-
(i) That the FIR is registered only under Sections
406, 420 and 114 of IPC and therefore maximum
punishment would be 7 years;
(ii) That the applicant is a lady accused and
investigation is over and charge-sheet is already
filed, and therefore, she may be enlarged on regular
bail;
(iii)That the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
respect of an application for anticipatory bail being
Criminal Misc. Application No.16098 of 2023 preferred
by the co-accused Amar Kantilal Makwana passed an
order dated 12.09.2023 and directed the IO to follow
the dictum of the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the cases of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar,
reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273, Satender Kumar Antil v.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14872/2023 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2023
undefined
CBI & Anr., reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Md.
Asfak Alam v. State of Jharkhand and Anr. , reported
in (2023) SCC Online SC 892. Therefore the present
applicant be enlarged on regular bail.
4. Learned APP Mr. J. K. Shah vehemently opposed
this application for bail and submitted that though
the FIR is registered by the first informant in
respect of fraud committed by the present applicant
to the tune of Rs.25 lakh, out of which Rs.3 lakh
have been returned and Rs.22 lakh are still to be
returned to the present applicant but actually the
magnitude of the scam is much higher. The present
applicant has duped in all 14 persons and the total
amount involved is Rs.1,38,00,000/- by adopting the
same modus operandi.
4.1. Learned APP Mr. Shah also submitted that the
allegations against the present applicant are of
serious nature as she is running a Trust for the
development of people belonging to Scheduled Caste
and under the guise of running that charitable Trust,
actually she carried out business and thereby duped
the people; she has failed to carry out any work for
the development of downtrodden people belonging to SC
nor she has returned the amount to the first
informant or offered plot as per her promise.
4.2. Learned APP Mr. Shah submitted that considering
the fact that in all 14 persons are defrauded by the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14872/2023 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2023
undefined
present applicant and though the charge-sheet is
filed in respect of the applicant, the IO is in
process of filing supplementary charge-sheet and as
further investigation is going on, present applicant
may not be enlarged on regular bail considering the
gravity of offence.
5. Learned advocate Mr. Nayak appearing for the
complainant further drew attention of this Court to
the affidavit filed by the IO wherein it is stated
that the amount received from various people who were
interested in investing the amount in the activities
of the Trust, the present applicant has sent the
aforesaid amount to one Pakistani national viz. Ahmed
Fazal, who is presently staying at Dubai and the
aforesaid amount is invested in Dubai at present and
therefore considering the aforesaid aspect, learned
advocate Mr. Nayak prayed that the present
application for bail may be rejected.
6. Learned advocate Mr. Malkan disputes the
aforesaid fact and submitted that the aforesaid fact
are stated in the affidavit by the IO on the basis of
the statement of the co-accused who was under custody
and therefore the same may not be considered by this
Court.
7. I have heard learned advocates for the parties
and perused the record. I have considered the fact
that the present applicant has not just defrauded one
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14872/2023 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2023
undefined
person but there are 14 other persons also who are
defrauded by the present applicant and the magnitude
of the scam is expanded to Rs.1,38,00,000/- till date
and the investigation is still going on as the co-
accused has not been arrested till date and as per
the statement of learned APP, under the instructions
of the IO, that IO is in process of filing
supplementary charge-sheet. Further, considering the
fact that under the pretext of running a charitable
Trust for the upliftment of the people belonging to
Scheduled Caste, prima facie, it seems that present
applicant is more interested in cheating the people
and siphoning of huge amount and therefore
considering the overall facts and circumstances as
well as considering the gravity of offence, I do not
deem it appropriate to enlarge the applicant on
regular bail. However, considering the fact that
applicant is a lady accused, trial is expedited and
if the same is not over within a period of 9 months,
liberty is reserved in favour of applicant to apply
for regular bail before the learned Trial Court.
8. With aforesaid observations and directions,
present application is required to be dismissed and
accordingly the same is dismissed. Rule discharged.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)
LAVKUMAR J JANI
