Gujarat High Court
Sagar Ambaram Fultaria vs State Of Gujarat on 1 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
Reserved On : 25/06/2025
Pronounced On : 01/07/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO.
8148 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
SAGAR AMBARAM FULTARIA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SAMRAT R UPADHYAY(11939) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR DM DEVNANI(5880) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR NIRAJ SHARMA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
CAV JUDGMENT
1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of
rule for respondent - State of Gujarat.
2. By way of the present 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.
11189003250401 of 2025 registered with the 'A'
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
Division Police Station, Morbi City for the
alleged offences as mentioned in the FIR.
3. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Samrat Upadhyaya for
the applicant, learned APP Mr. Niraj Sharma for
the respondent - State and learned advocate Mr.
D.M. Devnani for the original complainant.
4. Learned Advocate Mr. Upadhyaya submits that the
so-called incident is occurred on 10.07.2024,
whereas, FIR is registered on 15.03.2025. Thus,
there is gross delay in registering the FIR. He
further submits that FIR is registered against
two accused persons, wherein, applicant stood at
serial No.2. He further submits that by making
cursory glance upon the allegations levelled in
the body of the FIR, it would have been found
out that applicant is a bona fide purchaser and
he had entered into a transaction by executing
an Agreement for Sale and paying amount of sale
consideration to the original owner and that too
after publishing an advertisement in the
newspapers for inviting objections about the
transaction took lace between the applicant and
co-accused. He further submits that nobody has
raised any objections and therefore under the
bona fide belief, present applicant has entered
into transaction with the co-accused and said
fact is clearly found out from the papers.
5. Learned advocate Mr. Upadhyaya further submits
that in fact on the basis of the mutation of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
entry in the revenue record, complainant has
raised objections and therefore revenue
proceedings have been initiated and after
considering and appreciating the materials
available before him, the learned Deputy
Collector had come to the conclusion that the
entry mutated in the revenue record is genuine
one and therefore the objections raised by the
original complainant were rejected. Being
aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said
order, the complainant has moved before the
learned Collector by initiating appropriate
proceedings, wherein, other persons have also
been joined as party despite the fact that they
were not party in the original proceedings
initiated before the learned Deputy Collector.
He further submits that though the applicant was
not a party before the Deputy Collector, he has
been joined in the proceedings initiated before
the learned Collector. He further submits that
notice was duly served to the applicant and
therefore he appeared before the learned
Collector. In the said proceedings, the learned
Collector had initially passed an order granting
status-quo. Thereafter, without affording an
opportunity of hearing to the applicant,
straight way, the order passed by the learned
Deputy Collector has been set aside by the
learned Collector. The said order is challenged
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
before this Court by way of preferring a
petition, which is pending for adjudication.
6. Learned advocate Mr. Upadhyaya further submits
that it is the specific case of the applicant
that co-accused Shantaben had entered into an
Agreement for Sale with the applicant in the
year 2017 and applicant herein had already paid
the amount of sale consideration mentioned in
the said document despite the said fact the co-
accused did not execute sale deed in favour of
the applicant. Therefore, applicant herein is
constrained to file civil litigation before the
competent Court by way of instituting a civil
suit, whereupon, summons/notice came to be
issued and served upon the co-accused and she
appeared before the Court and at that relevant
point of time, settlement came to be arrived at
between the parties and therefore the suit was
withdrawn by the applicant. He, therefore,
submits that the aforesaid entire sequence of
events of incident clearly goes on to show that
applicant is a bona fide purchaser of the
property in question and he has already paid the
amount of sale consideration to the co-accused
and he has been made a scapegoat with a sole
intent to extract money from him. He further
submits that present applicant has inimical
terms with the local MLA and due to the
influence of the local MLA, applicant has been
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
framed by the prosecuting agency in a wrong case
and at the instance of the local MLA, police
authority has recorded statement of certain
witnesses against the present applicant and to
fortify his claim, he has produced certain
photographs and submitted that in fact the local
MLA was found in the chamber of Collector and he
has given interview to the media, which clearly
goes on to show that local MLA was keeping eye
on the said property and with a sole intent to
grab the said valuable property in a throwaway
price from the present applicant, applicant has
been implicated in a wrong case. Learned
advocate Mr. Upadhyaya further submits that at
the time of rejecting the anticipatory bail
application of the applicant, the learned
Sessions Judge has given specific finding that
original Agreement for Sale executed between the
applicant and the co-accused in the year 2017 is
within the custody of the applicant and
therefore for the purpose of recovery of the
said document, custodial interrogation of the
applicant is needed. He further submits that
applicant is ready and willing to extend all
kinds of support and cooperation to the
investigating officer and even he is ready and
willing to handover the said document to the
investigating officer. He further submits that
applicant herein has not made and/or created any
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
bogus document and his entire transaction is
genuine and bona fide one and considering the
aforesaid factual aspects, applicant may be
released on anticipatory bail. He further
submits that custodial interrogation of the
applicant is not needed as the entire case is
based upon the documentary evidences and all the
documents and materials are already collected by
the investigating officer.
7. Learned advocate Mr. Upadhyaya further submits
that with a sole intent to frame the present
applicant, the prosecuting agency is acting in a
particular manner at the instance of the local
MLA. It is an admitted position of fact that co-
accused and other accused persons were very much
available, despite the said fact, those persons
have not been arrested, instead, certain
facilities have been provided to them. Even the
co-accused has filed a petition before this
Court wherein she has tried to throw all the
liabilities on the head of the present
applicant. He submits that the aforesaid entire
sequence of events of incident clearly goes on
to show that the prosecuting agency anyhow wants
to book the present applicant.
8. Learned advocate Mr. Upadhyaya further submits
that if the intention of the present applicant
is to grab the valuable property of the
complainant then he would not have waited for 7
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
years and after the execution of the Agreement
for Sale, within no time, he would have executed
registered sale deed in his favour. But, he
waited up to certain period of time and gave
sufficient opportunity to the co-accused to
clear the title of the property. Therefore,
considering the aforesaid overall facts of the
present case, applicant may be enlarged on
anticipatory bail by imposing suitable terms and
conditions. He has put reliance upon the
following decisions and submitted that
considering the law laid down by the Hon'ble
Apex Court as well as Larger Bench of Allahabad
High Court and various High Courts, this is a
fit case wherein the discretionary powers of
anticipatory bail can be exercised in favour of
the applicant.
1. Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of
Maharashtra, reported in (2011) 1 SCC 694;
2. Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P., (1994) 4
SCC 260;
3. Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab,
reported in (1980) 2 SCC 565;
4. Arnab M. Goswami v. State of Maharashtra,
reported in (2021) 2 SCC 427;
5. Ravindra Saxena v. State of Rajasthan,
reported in (2010) 1 SCC 684;
6. State of Madhya Pradesh v. Narmada Bachao
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
Andolan, reported in (2011) 7 SCC 639;
7. Ramesh Kumar v. State of NCT of Delhi,
reported in (2023) 7 SCC 461;
8. M. Srikanth v. State of Telangana, (2019)
10 SCC 373;
9. Sardool Singh v. Smt. Nasib Kaur, 1987
(Supp) SCC 146;
10 Smt. Manju Gupta v. Lt. Col. M. S. Paintal,
(1982) 2 SCC 412;
11. Som Mittal v. Government of Karnataka,
(2008) 3 SCC 753;
12. Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of
Uttar Pradesh, (2009) 4 SCC 437;
13. Smt. Amarawati v. State of U.P., 2004 SCC
OnLine All 1112;
14. The State of Maharashtra v. Kachrusingh
Santaramsingh Rajput, reported in (1994) SCC
OnLine Bom. 73; and
15. Anoop Gulati v. State of U.P., (2012) SCC
Online All 4097.
9. Present application is strongly objected by
learned APP Mr. Niraj Sharma appearing for the
respondent - State. He submits that for the
purpose of understanding the sinister plan
orchestrated by the present applicant to dupe
the complainant and others, certain sequence of
events of incident are required to be seen. He
further submits that basically the disputed
property belongs to the father of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
complainant. The said property was purchased by
him by executing registered sale deed and
thereafter in the year 1999, part portion of the
said property was sold by him to his brother by
executing registered sale deed and since then
property was running in the name of both the
brothers. Thereafter, father of the complainant
died. However, the legal heirs of the deceased
have not been brought on record as complainant
is illiterate person, however, possession of the
property is still lying in their custody. The
applicant entered into Agreement for Sale with
the co-accused in the year 2017 and at that
relevant point of time, though the name of the
accused No.1 was not there in the record of
rights, she entered into the transaction with
the applicant by executing Agreement for Sale.
He further submits that the name of the father
of the co-accused is similar to the name of the
owner of the property and therefore with a sole
intent to dupe the original owner of the
property, a false and fabricated pedigree was
prepared and Panch Case was also done in the
presence of Panchas and after fulfilling all
necessary formalities, name of the co-accused
had been entered in the year 2020. Therefore,
when the applicant had entered into the
transaction with the co-accused in the year
2017, property was not in her name and she was
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
not at all directly or indirectly associated
with the said property. Despite the said fact,
applicant had executed an Agreement for Sale of
the property in question with the co-accused. He
further submits that for the purpose of entering
the name of the co-accused in the revenue
record, she has produced death certificate of
her mother and father and on the strength of the
said document, entry was mutated in the revenue
record. He further submits that it is the case
of the applicant that he has not forged any
document and he is the bona fide purchaser, and
therefore, he may be enlarged on bail, however,
the presence of the applicant in the office of
Talati along with other persons, who had
submitted an application to obtain bogus
pedigree, is also found out on the basis of the
statements of the witnesses and/or materials
available on record. He further submits that
Talati had crystallized the role of the
applicant by specifically stating that the thumb
impression of the co-accused has been identified
by the applicant by making endorsement
(signature) on it, in his presence. Therefore,
at the time of preparing the said set of
documents, present applicant was very much
available in the office of Talati. Learned APP
Mr. Sharma submits that thus, when in presence
of the Talati, present applicant had identified
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
the thumb impression of the so-called legal heir
of the deceased and signature of the applicant
is found out upon the said paper, it cannot be
said that applicant is a bona fide purchaser and
he has not forged any document. Therefore, for
obtaining specimen signature of the applicant,
his custodial interrogation is required. Learned
APP has read the statements of the persons, who
have endorsed that the co-accused is the legal
heir of the deceased i.e. the original owner of
the property in question, wherein, they have
categorically stated that at the instance of the
present applicant, they had gone to the office
of Talati for such endorsement and for that
purpose, Rs.1,000/- has been paid by the
applicant to them. They were not knowing the
legal heir of the original owner but she was
very much available at the office of Talati at
the time of fulfillment of the requisite
requirements for obtaining pedigree. Learned APP
Mr. Sharma further submits that once the scam
was exposed, the FIR came to be registered and
investigating officer has collected all those
documents and materials and as a part of
investigation, just to check the veracity of the
documents, a report was called for from the
concerned authority about the genuineness of the
death certificate of the original owner of the
property in question to which the concerned
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
officer of the Municipality has submitted a
detailed reply wherein he has stated that the
death certificates produced along with those
documents are also forged. Therefore, it can
safely be said that at the time of obtaining
pedigree of the co-accused, false and fabricated
documents have been supplied.
10. Learned APP Mr. Sharma further submits that in
fact co-accused Shantaben is 70 years illiterate
lady and could not be able to authorise the
document by signing it. He further submits that
bank account of the said co-accused has been
opened and operated by the present applicant and
said fact is also verified from the statement of
the Bank Manager. He further submits that the
co-accused did not receive a single penny from
the said transaction and said fact is also found
out from certain transactions took place in the
account of the applicant and the co-accused. He
has produced a chart and submitted that the
entire money had been routed through different
accounts. He further submits that total amount
of Rs.94,50,000/- had come in to the account of
the present applicant by rotating it through the
accounts of A. J. Enterprise, R. C. Enterprise
and West Cost Enterprise. Thereafter, an amount
of Rs.83,70,000/- had been transferred in the
account of the co-accused by the present
applicant and on the strength of the said
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
entries made in the bank statement, applicant
has executed registered sale deed in his favour.
Those entries are mentioned in the sale deed. He
further submits that thereafter from the account
of the co-accused, the said amount had firstly
gone into the account of Meet Enterprise of the
ownership of Mr. Jagir Kiritkumar Khant and from
there the amount had gone into the account of
Mr. Harshad Bhalodiya and Yash Vaghariya and
those persons have paid the said amount in cash
to the applicant. Learned APP Mr. Sharma submits
that the aforesaid evidence/material clearly
goes on to show how the money has been routed
through various accounts and once again returned
to the applicant. He further submits that the
investigating officer has also recorded the
statements of all those persons (various
accountant holders) and they have very
categorically stated that at the instance of the
present applicant they had acted in a particular
manner and for the purpose of acting in such a
manner and doing that work, they obtained
certain amount as a commission from the
applicant. The aforesaid documents and materials
available on record crystallized the case of the
prosecution that a well designed plan has been
organized by the present applicant with a sole
intent to usurp valuable property of the
gullible persons. He further submits that the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
Bank Account of the co-accused was also opened
and operated by the applicant and the said fact
is also found out from the statement of the Bank
Officer. He further submits that the
investigation is still going on and with a view
to get details of the involvement of other
accused persons in the commission of crime,
custodial interrogation of the applicant is
badly needed. He submits that thus considering
the aforesaid overall facts of the present case,
this is a fit case wherein the Court may not
have to exercise discretionary powers by
enlarging the applicant on anticipatory bail.
11. Learned advocate Mr. D. M. Devnani for the
original complainant has adopted the aforesaid
arguments canvassed by learned APP and further
submitted that there is no delay in registering
the FIR, as contended by learned advocate Mr.
Upadhyaya for the applicant. He submits that in
fact when the complainant came to know about the
fact that the name of the co-accused is mutated
in the revenue record for the property in
question, he immediately made complaints to
various authorities including the Hon'ble Chief
Minister. Despite the said fact, his compliant
has not been registered. Therefore, complainant
constrained to approach before the Court and
thereafter the FIR has been registered by the
prosecuting agency. He further submits that even
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
the FIR is not registered as per the say of the
complainant and therefore misc. application is
also filed before this Court and the said matter
is pending for adjudication. Thereafter, the
investigation commenced and hence, by no stretch
of imagination, it can be said that there is
gross delay in registering the FIR. He,
therefore, submits that looking to the gravity
of the offence and the role played by the
applicant, the application may not be
entertained.
12. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for
the parties and perused the materials produced
on record, it is found out from the record that
applicant is one of the accused persons against
whom it is alleged that he and another co-
accused have hatched conspiracy to grab the
valuable property of the complainant by showing
the accused No.1 as the legal heir of original
land owner. It is found out from the record that
the property in question basically belongs to
the father of the complainant and thereafter
portion of the said land was sold to his brother
and since then they were the owners and
occupiers of the disputed property. Thereafter,
after the death of the father of the
complainant, the names of legal heirs of the
deceased have not been mutated though they were
in possession of the said land. It is the case
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
of the prosecution that complainant is
illiterate and therefore he has not initiated
any proceedings for mutation of their names. It
is the case of the prosecution that the name of
the father of the co-accused is similar to that
of the original owner of the property and
therefore with a sole intent to dupe the
complainant, a false and fabricated pedigree of
the co-accused was prepared and thereby name of
the co-accused has been entered into the revenue
record in the year 2020. Therefore, prima facie,
when the applicant had entered into the
transaction with the co-accused in the year
2017, she was at all not directly or indirectly
associated with the said property. Despite the
said fact, applicant had executed an Agreement
for Sale of the property in question with the
co-accused. I have also perused the statement of
one Panch Witness, who has signed the pedigree
of the co-accused. In the said statement, the
witness has categorically stated that at the
instance of the present applicant, he had signed
in the pedigree as a witness and for that work,
Rs.1,000/- has been paid by the applicant to
him. As per the say of the said witness,
applicant, one old lady and one another person
of around 40 years of age were present over
there in the office of Talati. Hence, it is
found out that at the time of preparing the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
pedigree, present applicant was very much
available in the office of Talati. As per the
case of the prosecution, after the registration
of the FIR, the investigating officer has
collected the documents and just to check the
veracity of death certificates produced at the
time of preparing the pedigree, a report was
called for from the office of Municipality and
the concerned officer of the Municipality has
submitted a detailed reply wherein he has stated
that the death certificates produced along with
those documents are forged. It is also found out
from the record that even the bank account of
co-accused Shantaben was opened and operated by
the applicant accused and said fact is fortified
from the statement of Bank officer. I have also
perused the chart prepared by the learned APP
from which it transpires that whatever amount
paid by the applicant to the co-accused as an
amount of sale consideration of the land in
question has been returned back to the applicant
through various accounts. The said fact is also
fortified from the statements of various persons
recorded by the investigating officer during the
course of investigation as also the bank
statements. The bare perusal of the
papers/materials clearly goes on to show that
the co-accused might not have received a single
penny from the aforesaid transactions and
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
therefore the argument canvassed by learned
advocate for the applicant that co-accused and
other persons have tried to throw the
liabilities on the head of the present applicant
does not sustain. I have also perused the
statements of various accountant holders,
wherein, they have very categorically stated
that at the instance of the present applicant
they had acted in a particular manner and for
doing that work, they obtained certain amount as
commission from the applicant. The aforesaid
documents and materials available on record
crystallized the case of the prosecution that a
well designed plan has been organized by the
present applicant with a sole intent to grab
valuable property of the illiterate and gullible
persons. Moreover, the investigation is still
going on and to ascertain involvement of other
accused persons in the commission of crime and
for obtaining specimen signature of the
applicant, in the opinion of this Court,
custodial interrogation of the applicant is
required. Hence, the decisions upon which
reliance is being placed by learned advocate for
the applicant, would not be of any help to the
applicant at this stage.
13. Moreover, during the course of investigation,
the investigating officer has also recorded
statements of number of witnesses and also
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8148/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
collected various documents. I have also perused
the statements, which are referred and relied
upon by the learned APP during the course of
hearing of this application. Considering the
materials available on record, I am of the
opinion that, prima facie, applicant is involved
in the commission of crime. Thus, considering
the gravity of the offence and the fact that the
investigation is at a nascent stage, I am of the
opinion that this is not a fit case where
discretionary powers of anticipatory bail can be
exercised in favour of the applicant. The
application is, therefore, dismissed. Rule is
discharged.
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J)
LAVKUMAR J JANI
