Gujarat High Court
Lalaji Vishnuji Thakor vs State Of Gujarat on 8 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2692/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO.
2692 of 2025
==========================================================
LALAJI VISHNUJI THAKOR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. MAULIK M SONI(7249) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 08/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
BE YOU EVER SO HIGH, THE LAW IS ALWAYS ABOVE YOU
(1) By way of present application under Section 482 of the BNSS, the
applicant-original accused has prayed to grant anticipatory bail in
the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR being
C.R.No.11206073240525 of 2024 registered at Vadnagar Police
Station, Dist: Mehsana, for the offences punishable under
Sections 406, 409, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
(2) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has
been falsely implicated in the offence. There is a delay in the
registration of the FIR, and the complainant has failed to provide
any explanation for the delay. Other co-accused have been
granted regular bail. The applicant has cooperated with the
investigation and is willing to join further investigation, if required.
It is also submitted that the FIR was filed 3 months and 21 days
after the raid was conducted. The applicant has no previous
criminal antecedents. Furthermore, the nature of the allegations is
such that custodial interrogation is not necessary at this stage. The
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2692/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/04/2025
undefined
applicant is available for the investigation and will not flee from
justice. In view of the above, it is prayed that the applicant be
granted anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the applicant has
relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of
Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2020) 5
SCC 1.
(3) The Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of
the respondent-State, has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail,
citing the nature and gravity of the offense. He has submitted that
the applicant is the mastermind and is deeply involved in the
criminal activity. The applicant is accused of committing fraud and
misappropriating the hard-earned money of investors. It is further
submitted that, upon receiving a complaint through the Cyber
Crime Helpline No. 1930, the police conducted an investigation
and carried out a raid. During the raid, it was discovered that the
accused, in connivance with others, had hatched a criminal
conspiracy. They used dummy SIM cards to contact individuals
interested in investing money in the stock market, offering false
promises of high returns. The funds were transferred to various
accounts, and the money was subsequently siphoned off. The
applicant, identifying himself as a commission agent/broker
without any license, used the Market Pulse App to provide stock
tips, luring individuals with the prospect of significant returns. The
applicant has received a total of Rs. 29,63,912/- which was
subsequently withdrawn by the accused through ATM and other
modes. The applicant is involved in an economic offense.
Furthermore, during the investigation, it was found that multiple
accounts were being used, and a money trail was traced to the
applicant's account. In light of the above, custodial interrogation
of the applicant is essential. Therefore, the application for
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2692/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/04/2025
undefined
anticipatory bail does not warrant any consideration.
(4) This Court has considered the rival submissions made by learned
counsel for both the sides and considered the material placed on
record.
(5) The criteria to grant anticipatory bail and regular bail has been laid
down by the Apex Court in various decisions. While criminal
administration of justice disturbed, arrest is a part of investigation.
After the arrest of the accused when substantial part of the
investigation including remand gets over, then the Court has to
exercise jurisdiction considering the evidence collected during
investigation. It is needless to say that Section 482 of the BNSS is
pre-arrest bail as there is a part of investigation and importance of
the arrest is time and again discussed by the Hon'ble Apex Court.
When the involvement of the accused is prima facie revealed and if
allegation is not levelled that to defame him or to tarnish his
image, the Court has to exercise jurisdiction, but to seek
anticipatory bail is not an extraordinary jurisdiction and absolute
right of the accused.
(6) Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and
after perusing the record, it appears that the applicant is named in
the FIR and the investigation is still ongoing. It is important to note
that the applicant is facing charge under Section 420 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860, for which the maximum punishment is up to 7
years. The learned counsel for the applicant has relied on the
Investigating Officer's affidavit and contended that the applicant
did not receive the money, and no money trail has been found in
his account. It was further stated that the applicant only managed
to open the accounts and, after receiving the money, paid
commission. The applicant allegedly opened the accounts on rent,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2692/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/04/2025
undefined
and aside from this, no other role is attributed to him. The counsel
also submitted that co-accused in similar situations have been
granted regular bail. Considering the conduct of the applicant and
his prima facie involvement, the learned Sessions Judge dismissed
the anticipatory bail application of the applicant. From the outset,
the applicant's involvement has been evident. The applicant has
defrauded Rs. 6.91 crore under the pretext of high returns in the
stock market. The said amount was withdrawn by the applicant
through self-issued cheques in his favour, ATM withdrawals, and
online transactions.
(6.1) During the investigation of Janva Jog entry, based on the
Cyber Crime portal, it was discovered that the applicant had
downloaded an app and learned how to make calls to individuals
interested in investing money in the stock market, thereby luring
them. For every profit earned by the consumers, the applicant
received a 15% commission. The applicant had also opened an
account with Axis Bank, through which he received money via
barcode. Initially, he received Rs. 4.50 lakh, at which point the
Vadnagar Smart Police Station recorded his statement which is
extracted to Rs.6.91 crore. Subsequently, during the investigation,
statements of co-accused were also recorded.
(6.2) Given the gravity of the offense and the complaints received
by the Cyber Crime Police Station, as present applicant is master
mind of the entire scam, the investigation was transferred to the
Special Investigating Team (SIT). It was found that the applicant
had attempted to influence the investigation, prompting a
transfer of investigation to SIT and change in the investigating
officer of SIT also. Departmental proceedings were initiated
against the erring officer. The role of the applicant has been
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2692/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/04/2025
undefined
clearly revealed from the outset, although some leniency was
given by the investigating officer, which highlights the
applicant's potential to influence the investigation. Furthermore,
a money trail was found in the applicant's account. The applicant is
currently on the run, and his name appears in Column No. 2 as he is
evading his arrest and on NCRB portal also, other complaints are
received which suggest the involvement of such dummy accounts,
which are also yet to be investigated.
In such circumstances and considering the gravity of
offence, if anticipatory bail is granted to the applicant, there is a
possibility that he could tamper with evidence or influence
witnesses. Hence, custodial interrogation of the applicant is
required.
(7) Considering the aforesaid fact and keeping in the mind and after
going through the investigation papers, prima facie, it appears that
the present applicant is actively involved in the offense. Therefore,
if bail is granted, then it may adversely affect the case of
prosecution as investigation is at prelimianry stage. This Court has
considered the interest of the prosecution and the applicant's
personal liberty, it cannot over-side the larger public interest and
accused facing charge of organized crime syndicate. Prior to give
weightage to personal liberty, the Court has to strike balance
between personal liberty and a larger interest of society.
(8) So far the submission of parity is concerned, even the applicant
cannot claim parity because the co-accused are released on regular
bail and this is an anticipatory bail. Without proper investigation, it
is impossible to unearth the large scale scam, the syndicate and to
find out the modus operandi, if bail is granted at this primary stage,
which would amount to premium to unethical and immoral
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2692/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/04/2025
undefined
personality. The public confidence in the system undermines,
keeping in mind sensitivity of matter and if in cavalier fashion
benefit of parity extended or bail granted, then not only wrong
message will travel in the public but hamper the investigation and
tampered with an evidence which is nothing but amounts to
premium to wrongdoers.
(9) In aforesaid backdrop, custodial interrogation and detail inquiry is
necessary. When serious offences are disclosed and involvement of
an accused prima facie established then, the Court would be loath
to lean in favour of grant of pre-arrest bail in absence of any other
overriding considerations. The alleged offence is in nature of white
collar and economic offence, this Court is conscious with the
safeguards provided under Section 482 of BNSS and concept of the
personal liberty. Arrest is part of the process of investigation and
intended to secure several purposes. In which the accused may
provide information, during the the discovery of material facts and
to relevant information.
(10) At the time of deciding the bail application, the Court should
refrain from appreciating the evidence. However, considering the
submissions made by the learned advocates for the respective
parties and the fact and specific stand taken by the applicant to
extend the benefit of parity as the co-accused are released on
regular bail. Hence, this Court has considered the material collect
during the course of investigation with a view to examine the
applicability of parity. The reference is required to be made in a
cases of Tarun Kumar Vs. Asst. Director, Directorate of
Enforcement, 2023 INSC 1006 and Ramesh Bhavan Rathod vs.
Vishanbhai Hirabhai Makwana, reported in AIR 2021 SC 221,
wherein, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that when deciding a bail
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2692/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/04/2025
undefined
application and extending the benefit of parity, the Court has to
examine the exact role attributed to the accused. If the accused
played a similar role, then the Court should extend the benefit of
parity. Merely some words or any observation made in the order
are not enough, such approach is erroneous and inappropriate for
considering the benefit of parity. As co-accused are released on
regular bail, the applicant is not entitled to claim parity in
anticipatory bail.
(11) Keeping in mind the aforesaid fact as well as the judgment relied
upon by learned counsel for the applicant in the decision of this
Court in case of Sushila Aggarwal & Ors. (supra) would not helpful
to the case of the applicant. However, it is to be noted that while
deciding the bail application, the Court should not blindly rely
upon the precedent as held by the Apex Court in the case of
Kalyan Chandra Sarkar Vs. Rajesh Ranjan Alias Pappu Yadav,
reported in (2004 (7) SCC 528, as each case should be decided on
its own merits and the Court has to consider the facts of each case
and in the instant case, prima facie involvement of the accused is
found.
(12) Further, in the case of Pratibha Manchanda vs The State of
Haryana, reported in AIR 2023 SC 3307, wherein the Hon'ble Apex
Court has held in Para 19 as under:
19. The relief of Anticipatory Bail is aimed at safeguarding individual
rights. While it serves as a crucial tool to prevent the misuse of the
power of arrest and protects innocent individuals from harassment,
it also presents challenges in maintaining a delicate balance
between individual rights and the interests of justice.
The tight rope we must walk lies in striking a balance between
safeguarding individual rights and protecting public interest. While
the right to liberty and presumption of innocence are vital, the
court must also consider the gravity of the offence, the impact on
society, and the need for a fair and free investigation. The court's
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2692/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/04/2025
undefined
discretion in weighing these interests in the facts and circumstances
of each individual case becomes crucial to ensure a just outcome."
(13) In such circumstances, when investigation is at preliminary stage
and anticipatory bail is granted, it may hamper the investigation
and to collect the material in the more information, and find out the
involvements of another person custodial interrogation is also
necessary, therefore, keeping in mind the law laid down by the
Honourable Supreme Court in the case of (i) State Rep. by the CBI
V/s Anil Sharma reported in 1997 (7) SCC 187, (ii) Adri Dharan Das
V/s State of W.B. reported in 2005 (4) SCC 303 and (iii) P.
Chidambaram V/s Directorate of Enforcement reported in AIR
2019 SC 4198, application does not deserve any consideration.
(14) In the case of Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Vikas Mishra
@ Vikash Mishra, reported in (2023)6 SCC 49, the right of
custodial interrogation is very important right of the investigating
agency to unearth the truth and which the accused has purposely
and successfully tried to frustrate. Hence, police custody for
interrogation is necessary. Here in the case on hand, complainant
has lost his hard earned income and to recover the said amount,
custodial interrogation is necessary. It is also important to refer
the decision of Manik Madhukar Sarve vs Vithal Damuji Meher,
reported in 2024 INSC 636. In the case of economic offence, many
time amount is diverted or siphoned off in different accounts and
for that custodial interrogation is required which is an important
tool to trace out the amount. It is apt to refer the decision of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India delivered in case of State of
Gujarat Vs. Mohanlal Jitmalji Porwal & Anr., reported in 1987
(2) SCC 634, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court in para 5 held as
under:-
"5. The entire community is aggrieved if the economic offenders who ruin the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2692/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/04/2025
undefined
economy of the State are not brought to book. A murder may be committed
in the heat of moment upon passions being aroused. An economic offence is
committed with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on
personal profit regardless of the consequence to the Community. A disregard
for the interest of the community can be manifested only at the cost of
forfeiting the trust and faith of the Community in the system to administer
justice in an even handed manner without fear of criticism from the quarters
which view white colour crimes with a permissive eye unmindful of the
damage done to the National Economy and National Interest."
(15) Further, keeping in mind Law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre V/s State of
Maharashtra and Others reported in (2011) 1 SCC 694. Herein, I
have gone through the material available against the accused very
carefully and it appears that herein, no complaint has been made
with view to humiliating or tarnish the image of the present
applicant.
(16) Even in Jai Prakash Singh V/s State of Bihar and another,
reported in (2012) 4 SCC 379, Honourable Supreme Court
pleased to hold:
"Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offenceare
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."
(17) The object of anticipatory bail is that person should not be
harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy the grudge or personal
vendetta of the complainant. In present case, no any such sort of
allegation or bias is found out it is needless to say that order under
Section 482 of the BNSS is not a passport to the commission of
trial nor a shield against any serious accusation, which adversely
affects the society. Here in the instant case, the complainant has
lost his hard earned money.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2692/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/04/2025
undefined
(18) This Court is of the considered view that if the present accused is
equipped with protective order, it would obviously adversely
affect the case of the prosecution and the qualitative investigation
as applicant is having trained legal mind and he will tamper with
evidence and witnesses of prosecution and here two accused are
still out of reach, who are directly connected with the present
accused and other co-accused.
(19) In the above facts and circumstances and considering the
observations on the legal aspect of the matter, this Court has
absolutely no doubt that if applicant is equipped with such an
order before he is interrogated by the Police, it would greatly
harm the investigation and would impede the prospects of
unearthing all the ramifications involved in the conspiracy. Having
considered nature and seriousness of the charge, prima facie
involvement of accused and possibility of tempering with
evidences, it does not appear to be just and proper to exercise the
discretion in favour of the applicant and accordingly, the
application for anticipatory bail is dismissed.
However, it is needless to say that, the observations made in
this order are tentative in nature.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
SUCHIT
