Gujarat High Court
Patel Yoginiben Mahendrabhai vs State Of Gujarat on 6 July, 2023
Author: Nirzar S. Desai
Bench: Nirzar S. Desai
R/CR.MA/11613/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/07/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 11613 of 2023
==========================================================
PATEL YOGINIBEN MAHENDRABHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SALIM M SAIYED(5172) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RONAK RAVAL APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 06/07/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of this application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C., the applicant has prayed for his release in event of his arrest in connection with FIR No.11214070230203 of 2023 registered with Bardoli Rural Police Station, Dist.Surat for offences punishable under Sections 403, 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Salim Saiyed for the applicant and learned advocate Mr.Ronak Raval for respondent - State.
3. In the FIR registered by one Champakbhai Page 1 of 6 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 11 20:35:05 IST 2023 R/CR.MA/11613/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/07/2023 Rambhai Vaghela, he has stated that he is having ancestral land at Village: Nogama, Tal.Bardoli, Dist.Surat admeasuring 164 Acres 91 Gunthas of land and the said land was acquired for the purpose of construction of Vadodara - Bombay express way and for the acquisition of land the compensation was also awarded in the year 2021 by the office of Special Land Acquisition Officer, Branch-I, Surat and for withdrawal of the compensated amount there was requirement of all the persons in whose names land was running as the land was ancestral land. When the complainant approached the office of Special Land Acquisition Officer, Branch-I, Surat on 22.02.2023, he was informed that the amount is deposited on 22.10.2022 in the name of Dinubhai @ Dineshbhai Dayalbhai Mayavanshi. Therefore, upon making an application under RTI, when the details were provided to the complainant on 01.03.2023, the complainant found that entire compensation amount was withdrawn and transferred on the basis of consent letter, affidavit and undertaking and the consent letter was in the name of seventeen persons and it was Dinubhai Dayabhai Page 2 of 6 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 11 20:35:05 IST 2023 R/CR.MA/11613/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/07/2023 Mayavanshi who obtained the consent letter. Accordingly total sum of Rs.2,93,43,166/- which the complainant was entitled to was actually transferred in the account of Dinubhai Dayabhai Mayavanshi and other persons and, therefore, FIR was registered.
4.1 Learned advocate Mr.Salim Saiyed submitted that present applicant is lady accused and she is innocent person and she was merely working in the office of one Jitubhai Senda who created bogus consent letter and other documents and she has merely obeyed the instructions of the person in whose office she was working and, therefore, considering the fact that she was an employee of Jitubhai Senda as well as considering the fact that she is lady accused and not the main accused person, she may be granted anticipatory bail.
4.2 Learned advocate Mr.Saiyed submitted that, as per his instructions, as the Bank account is freezed actually the amount which was alleged to have been transferred in the account of main accused i.e. Dineshbhai and other principal beneficiaries as the amount has not Page 3 of 6 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 11 20:35:05 IST 2023 R/CR.MA/11613/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/07/2023 been utilised yet which was claimed by the complainant present applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.
4.3 Learned advocate Mr.Saiyed further submitted that the co-accused are already enlarged on regular bail and the applicant has already appeared before the Investigating Officer and, therefore, as she has shown willingness to participate in the investigation, she may be granted anticipatory bail.
5.1 Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.Ronak Raval vehemently opposed the application and pointed out that though applicant claims to be working in the office of Jitubhai Senda, there is no material produced on record which would indicate that she was actually working in the office of Jitubhai Senda. Further, in the cause title also the occupation of the present applicant is shown as home-maker which is contrary to the submission made by learned advocate Mr.Salim Saiyed.
5.2 Learned APP further pointed out from the papers Page 4 of 6 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 11 20:35:05 IST 2023 R/CR.MA/11613/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/07/2023 that she was instrumental in introducing the main accused with Jitubhai Senda who is alleged to have prepared forged documents and not only that he is also one of the beneficiaries of this huge scam as the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- were deposited in her account by accused no.1 Dineshbhai as well as sum of Rs.1,48,000/- was deposited in her account by co- accused Dharmishthaben which also shows her active involvement and abettment in the offence in question and, therefore, considering the magnitude of the scam she may not be granted anticipatory bail.
6.1 I have heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the record. On perusal of the record, I found that though the present applicant claims to be an employee in the office of Jitubhai Senda, there is nothing on record to show that which office Jitubhai Senda was running or in which capacity present applicant was working under him. Further, the record indicates that the applicant is the beneficiary of the scam as she has not only aided and abetted co-accused Jitubhai Senda in preparing the forged documents on Page 5 of 6 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 11 20:35:05 IST 2023 R/CR.MA/11613/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/07/2023 the basis of which compensation was deposited in the account of main accused but also two different amounts vide two different transactions i.e. Rs.2,00,000/- and Rs.1,48,000/- were deposited in account of present applicant which prima facie shows active involvement of the present applicant in crime in question.
6.2 In view of above, even if the present applicant is lady accused, considering her role in the offence in question I do not deem it appropriate to grant her anticipatory bail.
7. For the reasons stated above, the present application is required to be dismissed and it is dismissed accordingly. Rule is discharged. No order as to costs.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J) MISHRA AMIT V. Page 6 of 6 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 11 20:35:05 IST 2023