Gujarat High Court
Siddhi Utamkumar Dasavi vs State Of Gujarat on 3 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14971/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 14971
of 2025
==========================================================
SIDDHI UTAMKUMAR DASAVI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
KARAN Y VYAS(8539) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR VISHWAS K SHAH(5364) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
Date : 03/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule returnable forthwith. 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.11210005250422 of 2025
registered with Athwalines Police Station, Surat for the alleged
offences as mentioned in the FIR.
3. The gist of the allegations made in the FIR is that the
accused persons as named in the FIR, have availed the facility of
cash credit of Rs.2.20 Crores from the complainant-Bank for the
purpose of taking over loan of the Axis Bank. It has been alleged
in the FIR that the amount of cash credit given by the
complainant-Bank has not been utilized for the purpose of which
it was advanced and the accused has not handed over the
documents of the mortgaged property and closed the account of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14971/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
cash credit and the concerned manager of the Axis Bank in
connivance with the accused had given them time to utilize the
amount. With this sort of allegations, the present FIR has been
registered.
4. Thus, apprehending her arrest pursuant to the registration
of the aforesaid FIR, the applicant preferred anticipatory bail
before the trial court, however, the trial court has not entertained
the said application and rejected the same.
5. Being aggrieved, the applicant is here before this Court with
the present application.
6. Learned advocate Mr. Karan Y. Vyas appearing for the
applicant submits that the allegations made in the FIR are of such
a nature, for which, custodial interrogation of the applicant at
this stage is not necessary. He further submits that the applicant
will keep herself available during the course of investigation as
well as the trial proceedings and will not flee from justice. He
further submits that three persons have been arraigned as
accused in the FIR, wherein the present applicant has been
shown as accused No.1. Learned advocate for the applicant
submits that the present applicant has nothing to do with the
Firm alleged to have been run by the present applicant and her
husband. However, it is being run by the husband only and the
present applicant is not maintaining the affairs of the said firm.
He submits that as there was a need for the funds for carrying
out the business, the husband of the applicant approached the
complainant-Bank for taking over the loan already obtained from
the Axis Bank, and therefore, the complainant-Bank demanded
certain documents including the documents of the property which
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14971/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
was mortgaged with the Axis Bank. However, the allegations are
to the effect that the present applicant in connivance with the
other co-accused, including the Manager of the Axis Bank, did not
provide any documents as demanded by the complainant-Bank,
and asked the Bank to issue a fresh letter of sanction upon
mortgage of another property, which was declined by the
complainant-Bank. However, the aforesaid allegations against
the present applicant are absolutely false and frivolous one and
the present applicant is absolutely innocent and she has not
committed any offence. Learned advocate Mr. Vyas further
submits that no overt act has been attributed to the present
applicant. He submits that the present applicant has never
abetted the said offence and she is not at all concerned with the
alleged offence in any manner. Learned advocate Mr. Vyas also
submits that if the allegations made in the FIR are to be read in
toto, the same do not satisfy any of the ingredients to constitute
the offence as alleged against the present applicant, as the same
are purely of a civil nature, and for that, the complainant-Bank
has already initiated proceedings before the Debt Recovery
Tribunal and the amount is already secured by way of the
registered mortgage in favour of the Bank.
7. Learned advocate Mr. Vyas further submits that the
present applicant has not conspired or cheated the complainant-
Bank. The complainant Bank has not filed the complaint with the
clean hands. There is nothing to even remotely suggest that the
present applicant had cheated the Bank since inception. There is
a huge and unexplained delay in the lodgment of the FIR.
Moreover, the value of the property which the applicant is ready
to mortgage with the complainant-Bank is much higher than the
property mortgaged with the Axis Bank. He also submits that all
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14971/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
the offences as alleged are triable by the Court of Magistrate. He
further submits that as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court time and
again and which has been consistently followed by the various
high courts that 'bail is rule and jail is exception'. Learned
advocate Mr. Vyas submits that there was no bad intention on the
part of the applicant, and even today, is ready and willing to
mortgage the property with the Bank. He submits that the
applicant is a young lady and has responsibility to maintain his
family, and she has a child aged about twelve years. Learned
advocate Mr. Vyas further submits that the present applicant is
ready and willing to extend full cooperation to the investigating
officer. Moreover, the entire case of the prosecution hinges upon
the documentary evidence, and all those documents have
already been recovered by the investigating officer during the
course of investigation qua the husband, and therefore, there is
no need for any custodial interrogation qua the present applicant.
8. In such circumstances, referred to above, learned advocate
Mr. Vyas for the applicant prays that there being merit in the
present application, the same be allowed and the applicant be
released on anticipatory bail.
9. On the other hand, the present application has been
vehemently opposed by the learned APP. Learned APP submits
that the present applicant has been named in the FIR along with
her specific role. He further submits that the present applicant
along with her husband approached the complainant-Bank for
taking over of the loan already obtained by them from the Axis
Bank, for which, the complainant-Bank showed its willingness
upon assurance being given by the present applicant and her
husband to deposit all the documents of the property which they
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14971/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
have mortgaged before the Axis Bank at the time of obtaining
the loan, however, despite the complainant-Bank credit the
amount in the account of the present applicant, however, as
assurance by the present applicant and her husband, the present
applicant and her husband did not take back the documents from
the Axis Bank and deposit it before the complainant-Bank, and
thereby committed the offence of criminal breach of trust. Then
also, the Bank has waited upto certain period, however, as the
present applicant failed to deposit the required documents, the
Bank was constrained to file the FIR. Thus, prima facie,
involvement of the present applicant is clearly found out from the
materials collected by the investigating officer. Moreover, the
present applicant has one similar kind of antecedent. Thus, it is
apparent on the face of the record that all the accused persons,
in connivance with each other, have committed the offence. It is
submitted that applicant has failed to establish case for
extraordinary relief.
10. In such circumstances, referred to above, learned APP prays
that there being no merit in the present application, the same be
rejected.
11. The present application has also been vehemently opposed
by learned advocate Mr. Vishwas K. Shah appearing for the
original complainant. He submits that the allegations in the FIR
are that though loan was sanctioned for taking over loan to close
the account of borrower-Shree Anand Impex already opened in
Axis Bank Private Limited and after the release of the mortgage
properties from Axis Bank Private Limited, mortgage the said
properties with the complainant-Bank. However, as stated in the
FIR, amount of Rs.2,20,00,000/- which was paid by the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14971/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
complainant-Bank for taking over of the loan from Axis Bank, has
been withdrawn by the present applicant and her husband as a
result of which the account with the Axis Bank could not be
closed and the properties mortgaged with the Axis Bank could
not be closed and the properties mortgaged with the Axis Bank
were not released for creating mortgage with the complainant-
Bank. Thus, the properties which were to be mortgaged with the
complainant-Bank could not be mortgaged by the borrower
because the Axis Bank's account was not closed. Learned
advocate Mr. Shah submits that the documents, as agreed, are
not at all deposited with the complainant-Bank, and as such, it
can be said that the present applicant has not strictly adhered
with the terms and conditions agreed upon between them, and
thereby committed offence of criminal breach of trust. He
submits that even the amount deposited by the complainant-
Bank has already been withdrawn by the present applicant and
her husband, and despite number of reminders being given to the
applicant and her husband, the property agreed to be deposited,
was not deposited with the complainant-Bank, which clearly
shows that there was a bad intention on the part of the present
applicant since inception. Under the circumstances, the
applicant may not be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
12. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and
perused the record.
13. It is well settled that, among other circumstances, the
factors to be borne in mind while considering an application for
bail are (i) whether there is any prima facie or reasonable
ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence;
(ii) nature and gravity of the accusation; (iii) severity of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14971/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
punishment in the event of conviction; (iv) danger of the
accused absconding or fleeing, if released on bail; (v)
character, behaviour, means, position and standing of the
accused. Though at the stage of granting bail execution and
appreciation of evidence is not permissible. Hence, custodial
interrogation is required.
14. It appears from the record that specific allegations have
been made against the present applicant and her husband that
they have availed the loan facility of cash credit of Rs.2.20
Crores from the complainant-Bank for the purpose of taking
over the loan of Axis Bank, however, the property had already
been mortgaged with the Axis Bank and the amount of cash
credit facility was not utilized for the purpose for which it was
advanced and the documents of the property already
mortgaged with the Axis Bank, as demanded by the
complainant-Bank time and gain, was also not provided to it by
the accused persons. Not only that, though asked by the
complainant-Bank to the accused persons to close the cash
credit account of the present applicant in the Axis Bank, all the
accused persons, in connivance with each other, did not close
the said account. Moreover, the amount credited by the
complainant-Bank for taking over of the loan, has also been
withdrawn and utilized by the present applicant and her
husband, and thereby committed the cheating and criminal
breach of trust with the public sector Bank by misappropriating
crores of rupees of the public at large, and it appears from the
record that the alleged amount of Rs.2,20,00,000/- is still to be
recovered. That apart, there is one offence of the similar
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14971/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
nature registered against the present applicant at Salabatpura
Police Station. It is also pertinent to note that the amount
involved in the present matter is quite huge and the offence is
committed with the Government owned public sector bank,
which makes the offence more grievous. Further, the offence
with which the applicant is charged with is an economic
offence and is against the interest of the society.
15. It goes without saying that the alleged offence of
misappropriating crores of rupees of the complainant-Bank as
well as the other gullible people is quite grave in nature.
Hence, while it is extremely important to protect the personal
liberty of a person, it is equally incumbent upon me to analyze
the seriousness of the offence and determine if there is a need
for custodial interrogation.
16. In Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of
Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, the Supreme Court carefully
considered the principles established by the Constitution
Bench in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2
SCC 565. After a thorough deliberation, the Supreme Court
arrived at the following conclusion:
"112. The following factors and parameters can be taken
into consideration while dealing with anticipatory bail:
(i) The nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact
role of the accused must be properly comprehended
before arrest is made;
(ii) The antecedents of the applicant including the fact as
to whether the accused has previously undergone
imprisonment on conviction by a court in respect of any
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14971/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
cognizable offence;
(iii) The possibility of the applicant to flee from justice;
(iv)The possibility of the accused's likelihood to repeat
similar or other offences;
(v) Where the accusations have been made only with the
object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting
him or her;
(vi)Impact of grant of anticipatory bail, particularly in
cases of large magnitude affecting a very large number
of people.
xxx xxx xxx"
17. In Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2018) 7 SCC
731, the Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court
reaffirmed that when considering applications for anticipatory
bail, courts should consider factors such as the nature and
gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and
the specific facts of the case.
18. In Satpal Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2018) 13 SCC 813,
the Supreme Court has held that the satisfaction of the court
for granting protection under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is different
from the one under Section 439 Cr.P.C. while considering
regular bail.
19. In Pratibha Manchanda and another Vs. State of Haryana
and another, (2023) 8 SCC 181, the Supreme Court has opined
that "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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14971/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
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."
20. This Court after considering number of decisions of the
Apex Court as well as of this Court, has observed in case of
MOHMED SALIM ABDUL RASID SHAIKH V. STATE OF GUJARAT
reported in 2001 [2] GLR 1580 as under;
"13. There is no scope for present applicant to urge that
he may be saved from disgrace or unwarranted hardship.
While entertaining the anticipatory bail application of the
accused, the Court should consider various aspects such
as;
[i] earlier offences registered against the applicant
accused and the nature thereof including the area of
activity, modus etc. if brought to the notice of the Court;
[ii] gravity of the circumstances in which the offence is
committed. Whether custodial interrogation is, prima
facie, unavoidable ?
[iii] likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice;
[iv] position and status of the accused individually and
also with reference to the victim and witnesses;
[v] likelihood of repetition of similar type of offence;
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14971/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
[vi] whether he would jeopardise his own life being faced
with grief or grim prospects of possible conviction in the
case;
[vii] likelihood of tampering with the evidence or
witnesses during the process of investigation, status and
stage of investigation;
[viii] plea of false implication on some special vendetta, if
taken.
[ix] other relevant grounds which may apply to facts and
circumstances of that particular case; "
21. Similarly, the Apex Court has also considered the scope
of Section 438 in case of DUKHISHYAM BENUPANI, ASSTT
DIRECTOR, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE [FERA] V. ARUN
KUMAR BAJORIA reported in 1998 [1] SCC 52. The relevant
observations made in para-7 are quoted as under :-
"7. It seems rather unusual that when the aggrieved
party approached the High Court challenging the order
passed by a subordinate court the High Court made the
position worse for the aggrieved party. The officials of the
Directorate are now injuncted by the Division Bench from
arresting the respondent and the time and places for
carrying out the interrogations were also fixed by the
Division Bench. Such kind of supervision on the enquiry
or investigation under a statute is uncalled for. We have
no doubt that such type of interference would impede the
even course of enquiry or investigation into the serious
allegations now pending. For what purpose the Division
Bench made such interference with the functions of the
statutory authorities, which they are bound to exercise
under law, is not discernible from the order under
challenge. It is not the function of the Court to monitor
investigation processes so long as such investigation
does not transgress any provision of the law. It must be
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14971/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
left to the investigating agency to decide the venue, the
timings and the questions and the manner of putting
such questions to persons involved in such offences. A
blanket order full insulating a person from arrest would
make his interrogation a mere ritual."
22. Coming to the case on hand, from the allegations levelled
in the FIR and the materials placed on record, it appears that
the very serious allegations of misappropriation of crores of
rupees have been made against the applicant. Moreover, the
present case also falls within the category of economic
offences and the amount involved in the present case is quite
huge, and it is trite law that in economic offences, benefit of
pre-arrest bail should not be extended in favour of the accused
in a casual manner. The amount involved in the present case is
also quite huge, and the offence as alleged is also punishable
with life imprisonment. Thus, at this stage, in my view,
custodial interrogation of the applicants is very much
necessary.
23. Lastly, it may be noted that as held in catena of
decisions, the economic offences constitute a class apart and
need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of
bail. The economic offences having deep-rooted conspiracies
and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed
seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the
economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious
threat to the financial health of the country. Undoubtedly,
economic offences have serious repercussions on the
development of the country as a whole. To cite a few
judgments in this regard are Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy vs.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14971/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2013) 7 SCC
439, Nimmagadda Prasad vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation, (2013) 7 SCC 466, Gautam Kundu vs.
Directorate of Enforcement (Prevention of Money-
Laundering Act), Government of India Through Manoj
Kumar, Assistant Director, Eastern Region, (2015) 16 SCC
1, State of Bihar and Another vs. Amit Kumar alias
Bachcha Rai, (2017) 13 SCC 751. The Supreme Court taking
a serious note with regard to the economic offences had
observed as back as in 1987 in case of State of Gujarat vs.
Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal and Another, (1987) 2 SCC 364
as under:-
"5... The entire community is aggrieved if the economic
offenders who ruin the economy of the State are not
brought to books. 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 collar crimes with a
permissive eye unmindful of the damage done to the
National Economy and National Interest..."
24. Moreover, when the Court is satisfied that a prima facie
case of custodial interrogation of the accused is made out by
the prosecution for securing the incriminating materials from
the information likely to be received from the accused, then
the power under Section 482 should not be exercised in a
routine manner. The presence of the applicant, in the peculiar
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14971/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
facts and circumstances of the present case, seems to be
needed to uncover the truth. Further, the discretion under
Section 482 cannot be exercised with regard to offences
punishable with death or imprisonment for life, unless the
court at that very stage is satisfied that such a charge appears
to be false or groundless. The larger interest of the public and
State demand that in serious cases like economic offences
involving cheating and misappropriation of huge volume of
amount, the discretion under Section 482 of the BNSS should
not be exercised.
25. Thus, what is discernible from the above is that while
deciding anticipatory bail application, it is the first duty of the
Court to see seriousness of the offence, prima facie case and
interest of the society at a large. Therefore, when no special
and compelling circumstances are made out and no case of
false implication of present applicant in the alleged offence is
made out before this Court, I am of the opinion that this Court
should refrain itself from exercising its discretionary powers in
favour of the present applicant at this stage.
26. Further, the present applicant 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 would frustrate the investigation.
27. In view of above discussion and considering the materials
produced before this Court, I am of the opinion that there
seems to be a prima facie involvement of the present applicant
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14971/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
in the commission of the alleged offence. Thus, this Court is of
the opinion that at the initial stage of the investigation of the
offence, grant of anticipatory bail in favour of the applicant is
likely to hamper the investigation and investigating agency is
likely to lose an opportunity to exploit all the fact situation,
probabilities or opportunities which the Agency may get during
the custodial interrogation of a person, and therefore, keeping
in mind all the factors, no interference is required at this stage.
The impugned order passed by the trial court, rejecting
anticipatory bail application of the applicant is just and proper
and does not require any interference at the end of this Court.
28. In the result, the present application, being devoid of
any merit, fails and is hereby rejected. However, it is made
clear that the observations made by this Court herein above at
this stage while deciding the anticipatory bail application,
would not come in the way of the applicant at the time as and
when if ultimately the trial court is proceeded with the trial,
and at the stage of consideration of regular bail application, if
preferred by the applicant. Rule is discharged.
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J)
VAHID
