Mitesh @ Nishant Gokulbhai Thakkar vs State Of Gujarat
2025 Latest Caselaw 5899 Guj

Gujarat High Court

Mitesh @ Nishant Gokulbhai Thakkar vs State Of Gujarat on 21 April, 2025

                                                                                                               NEUTRAL CITATION




                             R/CR.MA/7615/2025                                   ORDER DATED: 21/04/2025

                                                                                                               undefined




                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
                             R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
                                          CHARGESHEET) NO. 7615 of 2025
                       ==========================================================
                                           MITESH @ NISHANT GOKULBHAI THAKKAR
                                                          Versus
                                                    STATE OF GUJARAT
                       ==========================================================
                       Appearance:
                       MR BHARGAV BHATT, ADVOCATE WITH
                       MR MEET A SHAH(12392) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
                       MR. MANAN S DOSHI(9795) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
                       MS DIVYANGNA JHALA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
                       ==========================================================
                         CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
                                          Date : 21/04/2025
                                           ORAL ORDER

1. The present application is filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhit, 2023, for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R.NO. 11210005241161 of 2024 registered with Athwalines Police Station, Surat for the offences punishable under Sections 338, 336(2), 336(3), 340, 318(4), 319(2), 238, 61(2) & 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. Learned Advocate appearing for the applicant has submitted that in the present offence, the investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. The applicant has been arrested in connection with the present offence on 26.11.2024 and since then he is in custody.

2.1 Learned Advocate appearing for the applicant has submitted that the applicant herein is not named as an accused in the FIR. There is no averment in the FIR, which would connect the present applicant with the offence in question. The

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7615/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2025

undefined

father of the present applicant is running an Aangadiyapedhi and the applicant is working in the said Aangadiyapedhi as an employee. The applicant also receive salary from his father for being employed in the Aanganiyapedhi.

2.2 Learned Advocate appearing for the applicant has submitted that it is the of case of prosecution that the present applicant had received money from the other co-accused through Aanganiya, and thereafter, had converted the same into USDT. However, upon perusal of the charge-sheet papers, it appears that there is not a single document in the charge-sheet papers, which would fortify the case of prosecution as regard these allegations levelled against the applicant. It may be true that the applicant had received some money from the other co-accused through Aangadiya. However, since the applicant was also in the business of Aangadiyapedhi and there were other Aanganiyapedhis in the neighbourhood, the co-accused would send money through those other Aanganiyapedhis and since the applicant was situated in the nearby vicinity of the said Aangadiyapedhi, was asked the collect the said amount, which was sent by the other co-accused and hand it over to somebody else. The applicant herein was not at all aware about the dealings of the other co-accused. The material available on record also suggests that the applicant herein was completely unaware of those dealings of the other co-accused.

2.3 Learned Advocate appearing for the applicant has submitted that the prosecution seeks to rely upon certain screenshots, which were found from the mobile phone of the

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7615/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2025

undefined

present applicant. However, those screenshots had nothing to do with the offence alleged in the present FIR. Those screenshots were pertaining to the amount collected by the present applicant upon instructions of the other co-accused viz. Om.

2.4 Learned Advocate appearing for the applicant has submitted that the prosecution has cited several victims in the charge-sheet whose statements have also been recorded during the course of investigation. Perusal of those statements clearly indicate that they had been duped not in the present offence, but in some other offence, which was not even distantly connected with the present offence. The material collected during the course of investigation by the investigating agency does not make out any offfence against the present applicant. The allegations, which are levelled in the charge-sheet against the present applicant are without any basis.

2.5 Learned Advocate appearing for the applicant has submitted that in the absence of any material connecting the present applicant with the offence in question in the charge- sheet papers, the application should be allowed and the applicant should be ordered to be enlarged on bail subject to suitable conditions.

3. Learned Advocate appearing for the applicant has sought to rely upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Jalaluddin Khan Vs. Union of India reported in (2024) 10 SCC 574.

4. Learned APP has opposed the present application, inter

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7615/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2025

undefined

alia, contending that there is a strong prima-facie case against the present applicant for commission of the offence in question. The other co-accused Om used to send money through Aangdiya. The money, which was sent by him was the proceeds of fraud. The money so sent by the co-accused Om was collected by the present applicant. The receipt for the same are forming part of the charge-sheet, which bear the signatures of the present applicant for having received the amount.

4.1 Learned APP has submitted that the applicant herein used to convert the amount received by him in the USDT, and thereafter, would transfer those USDT to the other co-accused through wallet. The applicant is having another antecedent. He, therefore, submitted to dismiss the present application.

5. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the material available on record. In present case, the investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. From the record, it appears that the police authorities had received some information that the co-accused Makbul and his sons were getting the bank accounts opened in the names of several persons by alluring them of return of Rs.10,000/- to Rs.12,000/- towards commission and those bank accounts were being used for commission of the offence of fraud. On the basis of the said information, the premises of the said co-accused was raided and several passbooks and cheque books of the various bank accounts so opened along with the debit cards etc. were recovered from the said place. The investigation of the offence revealed that the said co-accused was running the said activity in partnership with the other co-accused viz. Maheshkumar

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7615/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2025

undefined

Mafatlal Desai. The record indicates that several complaints with regard to the said bank accounts have been registered at the NCCRP Portal across the country. These bank accounts were allegedly used for the purpose of deposit of proceeds of fraud. The material on record indicates that these accounts were being used for deposit of money by the victims of digital arrest and other such incidents.

6. The investigation into the offence revealed the involvement of the present applicant in the offence in question. The material available on record indicates that the other co-accused viz. Om Pandya and Mahesh Desai were transferring money through Aangadiya. The money, which was transferred by these co- accused was the proceeds of unlawful activities mentioned herein above. The material also suggests that it was the present applicant, who used to collect the money, which was sent by the aforesaid two co-accused through Aangadiya. There are receipt available on record, which bear the signatures of the present applicant for having received the said amount. Thus, the allegation against the present applicant as per the case of prosecution is that he used to collect the money, which was sent by the other co-accused through Aangadiya, gets support from the charge-sheet papers. Against this, it is the case on the part of present applicant that he was merely collecting the amount upon instructions of other co-accused. This argument canvassed at the behest of the applicant does not appear to be acceptable since such instances are not one or two, but on number of occasions, the applicant herein had received the money, which was sent by the other co-accused and had sent receipts for the

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7615/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2025

undefined

same. The other material on record also indicates that there were whats' app chats between the applicant and the other co- accused, which also indicate the involvement of the present applicant in the present offence. The material on record also indicates that the applicant herein was holding a wallet account, which was used for dealing in USDT. The applicant herein is used to convert the amount which he had received from the other co-accused into USDT and would transfer those USDT to the other co-accused through wallet and the applicant used to receive commission for the said purpose. The Investigating Officer has recorded the statements of the employees of various Aangadiyapedhis at whose offices, the applicant had gone for collecting the amount. These witnesses have categorically stated in their statements that the applicant used to come to their Aangadiyapedhis for collecting the amount. The material on record indicates that a systematic racket for commission of an economic offence. From the material available on record, it can prima facie said that the allegations levelled against the present applicant are not false. Hence, the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Jalaluddin Khan (supra), which is sought to be relied upon by learned advocate for the applicant does not render any assistance to the case of the applicant. Having regard to the same, no case is made out to release the present applicant on bail. Hence, the present application stands dismissed.

(M. R. MENGDEY,J) GIRISH