Gujarat High Court
Harsh S/O Ashish Wadhwa vs State Of Gujarat on 6 May, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8958/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 8958
of 2025
==========================================================
HARSH S/O ASHISH WADHWA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
AMITKUMAR V CHAUDHARY(9553) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. MAULIK M SONI(7249) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HK PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 06/05/2025
ORAL ORDER
(1) RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule on
behalf of respondent-State.
(2) 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.11205043250125 of 2025
registered at Bhuj B Division Police Station, Kachchh for
the offences punishable under Sections 319(2), 336(2),
336(3), 340(2), 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS read with Sections
66(D) and 66(d) of the IT Act.
(3) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the
applicant has been falsely implicated in the offence based
on the statement of co-accused. He has nothing to do with
the offence. Nothing is found from his conscious
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8958/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
possession. Even, we accept the allegations levelled against
the present applicant as it is even though, the allegations
levelled against the present applicant is that at the instance
of accused Nos.1 and 2, he has given instructions and
received money and in turn transferred in the said account,
except this no role is attributed to him. Present applicant is
not named in the FIR. Furthermore, the nature of the
allegations is such that custodial interrogation is not
necessary at this stage. The 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.
(4) The Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on
behalf of the respondent-State, has opposed the grant of
anticipatory bail, considering the nature and gravity of the
offence. It is submitted that the applicant is the
mastermind and is deeply involved in the criminal activities
under investigation. During the investigation, based on the
statements of co-accused persons, witness testimonies, and
other material evidence, the involvement of the present
applicant has been established. Though the applicant is not
named in the initial complaint, his name surfaced during the
course of the investigation. The co-accused has already
been arrested, and during interrogation, the role of the
present applicant has been clearly revealed. In collusion
and connivance with other accused persons, and in
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8958/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
furtherance of their common intention, the applicant is
alleged to have hatched a criminal conspiracy. Using
laptops and other electronic gadgets, they forged 16
Aadhaar cards, 13 PAN cards, 48 cheque books, 442 ATM
cards, and numerous documents for the purpose of
opening multiple bank accounts. To facilitate the scam,
they prepared forged notarized documents and false shop
addresses to open these fraudulent bank accounts. A total
of ₹80,40,869/- has been received through these accounts.
The applicant is alleged to have played a key role in
managing the entire scam, including coordinating via
WhatsApp and instructing others on how to receive and
further transfer the illicit funds, including through private
channels such as the P.M. Angadia network. Custodial
interrogation of the applicant is, therefore, necessary to
unearth the complete details of the conspiracy and to
recover the remaining amount. The applicant also has a
history of similar offences. Two criminal cases are
registered against him--one at Behrampura Police Station
in Orissa and another at Cyberabad Police Station in
Telangana. In view of these past antecedents, the present
application for anticipatory bail may not be allowed. It is
also important to note that the applicant is currently
absconding and is reported to be hiding in Rajasthan. A
statement recorded from his father confirms that he has
been on the run since the registration of the FIR. His
involvement has since been clearly established. The
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8958/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
applicant is accused of committing a serious fraud, and if
released on bail, there is a high likelihood that he may
tamper with evidence, especially volatile electronic data. In
light of the above, custodial interrogation of the applicant
is essential. Therefore, the application for anticipatory bail
does not deserve any consideration and may be rejected.
(5) This Court has considered the rival submissions made by
learned counsel for both the sides and considered the
material placed on record.
(6) 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.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8958/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
(7) Having heard the learned counsel for the respective
parties, gone through the complaint, and perused the
record. It appears that the name of the present applicant
was revealed during the investigation. The accused Nos. 1
and 2 were caught red-handed, and documents were also
recovered from the accused. It appears that 442 ATM cards
of different banks, 48 different cheque books, 13 PAN
cards, 16 UIDAI cards, a laptop, a pen drive, and other
electronic gadgets were recovered. The allegations
against the present applicant are that, along with accused
No. 2, he forged documents to open the bank accounts
including notarized documents, rent documents, and other
documents. Thereafter, the said accounts were used for
receiving the money and transfering the amounts through
various modes and through WhatsApp chats & calling, the
present applicant managed the entire scam, he is kingpin
and mastermind behind the scam, including the use of
codewords and passwords. During the investigation, it
reveals that through PM Angadia by using private channels,
the present applicant transferred Rs. 35,00,000/- and
through Hawala, he has received the amount. Nonetheless,
through the present applicant, in the account of the co-
accused, an amount of Rs. 80,40,869/- got transferred
through RTGS, NEFT, and Net Banking to another state, and
the said amount is also yet to be recovered. To unearth the
truth, custodial interrogation is required.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8958/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
(8) Additionally, it was found that the applicant is involved in
the offence of forgery. Considering the above facts,
custodial interrogation is necessary. It also appears that the
applicant has siphoned huge amount and committed a
systematic fraud and now taking disadvantage of his
knowledge playing with Investigating Agency and tried to
stay away from the clinches of law.
(9) It is worth to mention that the applicant is on run since
long. Hence, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in case of State of Haryana vs. Dharamraj
reported in 2023 INSC 784; Lavesh vs. (NCT of Delhi)
reported in (2012) 8 SCC 730; Abhishek vs. State of
Maharastra reported in 2022 (8) SCC 282 and Prem
Shankar Prasad vs. State of Bihar reported in 2021 SCC
OnLine SC 955 and Srikant Upadhyay and Others vs.
State of Bihar and Another reported in 2024 SCC OnLine
SC 282 and Serious Fraud Investigation Office vs. Aditya
Sarda reported in 2025 INSC 477, i am of the considered
view that this is not a fit case to exercise the jurisdiction to
grant of pre-arrest bail in favour of the applicant.
(11) Further, the present applicant-accused is involved in
white collar socio-economic offence which constitute a
class apart and needs to be visited with a different
approach. The economic offences adversely affect the
economic and social fabric of the country. In such
circumstances also, grant of anticipatory bail at this stage
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8958/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
would frustrate the investigation.
While granting the bail, the Court has to consider the
possibility of tampering and hampering with an evidence
and there is a possibility of accused to flee away from the
justice also.
(12) 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 preliminary 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.
(13) It is needless to say that 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 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8958/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
message will travel in the public but hamper the
investigation and tampered with an evidence which is
nothing but amounts to premium to wrongdoers. The
present applicant has received the amount in his bank
account. Thereafter, he siphoned the said amount by using
various private channels and through Angadia. The said
amount has yet to be recovered, and it remains to be
determined where he received it from. The entire matter
requires a thorough investigation.
(14) 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 socio economic
offence, this Court is conscious with the safeguards
provided under Section 482 of BNSS and concept of the
personal liberty. But herein, This court is considered of view
that, the present offence is committed very smartly and
very planned and methodically which is not just an offence
against any individual rather the largest societal interest
and in such circumstances, the delicate balance is required
to be maintained between two rights one against the
personal liberty and second is societal interest. 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8958/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
to relevant information. In such circumstances, when
investigation is in preliminary stage if, anticipatory bail is
granted 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 Hon'ble 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 (iii) P. Chidambaram V/s
Directorate of Enforcement reported in AIR 2019 SC
4198.
(15) Having regard to nature of allegations and stage of
investigations, held investigating agency must be given
sufficient freedom in process of investigation. Applicant is
not entitled to anticipatory bail as the same would hamper
the investigation
(16) Learned advocate for the argued that the applicant is
arraigned as an accused based on the statement of co-
accused, but it is needless to say that, during the
investigation, under Section 67 also statement of co-
accused is relevant is provided clue. Relying upon the
judgments of this Court rendered in the case of Mohmed
Salim Abdul Rasid Shaikh Vs. State of Gujarat, rendered
in 2001 (2) GLR 1580 as well as in the case of Dolatram
Tekchand Harjani Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in 2013
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8958/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
(3) GLR 2133, so far investigation is concerned, statement
of the co-accused is relevant and it provides the clue and
for that purpose, statement of co-accused is relevant and as
the serious offence is disclosed.
(17) Hence, in such cases, the Court should not exercise its
jurisdiction granting anticipatory bail. Even, this is not only
a case, merely based on the statement of co-accused, the
present applicant is arraigned as an accused. Perusing the
statement of another witnesses, it appears that present
applicant is involved in the illegal activity. For that custodial
interrogation is required and having past antecedents also.
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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8958/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
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 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."
(17) 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.
(18) 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:
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8958/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
"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 discretion in weighing
these interests in the facts and circumstances of
each individual case becomes crucial to ensure a just
outcome."
(19) It would be apposite to refer the decision of the Hon'ble
Apex Court in case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary versus.
Union Of India reported in 2022 11 SCC 705. Only
quantum of punishment is not only a criteria to grant bail
application and accused cannot claim anticipatory bail as of
right. Merely the quantum of punishment is not a sufficient
ground; the Court must also consider the impact on society
and larger interest of society.
(20) 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8958/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
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."
(21) Furthermore, if the applicant is indeed innocent, he ought
to have joined and cooperated with the police investigation
rather than absconding from the scene. However, he has
failed to do so and is currently evading arrest. This conduct
on the part of the applicant clearly indicates mens rea.
Innocent individuals generally do not display such unnatural
behavior in the ordinary course of events. In the present
case, the applicant's conduct is a significant factor and must
be duly considered. It is well-settled that conduct may vary
from person to person; however, when the involvement of
the accused is prima facie established, and the allegations
are not found to be maliciously intended to defame or
tarnish the image of the applicant, the Court must exercise
its jurisdiction judiciously. It is important to emphasize that
the grant of anticipatory bail is neither an extraordinary
jurisdiction nor an absolute right of the accused. In this
context, reference may be made to the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh vs.
Ram Kishan Balothia, reported in (1995) 3 SCC 221.
(22) 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8958/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
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.
(23) 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 other two accused are still out of
reach, who are directly connected with the present accused
and other co-accused.
(24) 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8958/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
anticipatory bail is dismissed. Rule is discharged.
However, it is needless to say that, the observations
made in this order are tentative in nature.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
KUMAR ALOK
