Gujarat High Court
Munir Ashifbhai Rathod vs State Of Gujarat on 2 February, 2026
Author: Nikhil S. Kariel
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23589/2025 ORDER DATED: 02/02/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 23589 of 2025
==========================================================
MUNIR ASHIFBHAI RATHOD
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BM MANGUKIYA(437) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS BELA A PRAJAPATI(1946) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR LB DABHI ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 02/02/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr.B.M.Mangukiya appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.L.B.Dabhi appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.
2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent-State.
3. The applicant has filed this application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the applicant on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being Page 1 of 6 Uploaded by NAIR SMITA V.(HC00186) on Fri Feb 06 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 09 20:31:25 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/23589/2025 ORDER DATED: 02/02/2026 undefined C.R. No.11193063250004 of 2025 registered with Cyber Crime Police Station, District: Amreli for the offence punishable under Sections316(2), 318(4), 61(2), 54 of B.N.S.Act and under Section 66(d) of I.T. Act.
4. Learned advocate for the applicant would submit that considering the role attributed to the applicant, and nature of the allegation levelled, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail. It is further submitted that since the charge-sheet is filed no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in jail for indefinite period. It is further contended that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this Court if released on bail.
5. As against the same, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - State has vehemently objected to the grant of regular bail. Learned APP has submitted that looking to the nature of offence and the role attributed to the present applicant as coming out from the charge-sheet, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant and the application may be dismissed.
Page 2 of 6 Uploaded by NAIR SMITA V.(HC00186) on Fri Feb 06 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 09 20:31:25 IST 2026NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/23589/2025 ORDER DATED: 02/02/2026 undefined
6. Having heard learned advocate Mr. B.M.Mangukiya for the applicant and learned APP Mr. L.B.Dabhi for the respondent - State and having perused the documents on record, this Court is declined to consider this matter for the following reasons:
i. The allegations in the FIR being that the accused had conspired together and had procured mule accounts from various persons and had deposited money which were proceeds of Cyber crime in the said account and thereafter, had transferred the said amount to Binance account operated by the accused and converted the same into US Dollars.
ii. It would appear in this regard that as far as the entire fraud is concerned, the same is stated to be valued at around Rs.14,63,07,600/- and whereas in so far as the present applicant is concerned, it would appear that the applicant had used the Binance account to convert around Rs.2,93,68,800/- into 3,36,320 US Dollars.
iii. It would also appear in this regard that the accused had used a total of 39 accounts for the purpose of laundering money which were proceeds of Cyber crimes and whereas around 100 different complaints have been received in the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal from different States Page 3 of 6 Uploaded by NAIR SMITA V.(HC00186) on Fri Feb 06 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 09 20:31:25 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/23589/2025 ORDER DATED: 02/02/2026 undefined as regards the 39 accounts in question.
iv. While learned advocate Mr. Mangukiya would rely upon statements of certain persons more particularly, the statements of (1) Arsin Balubhai Dhimecha (2) Aftab Firoz Pathan, (3) Mahmad Sadiq Ismailbhai Jadav and (4) Navedat Yusuf Chauhan to contend that it was not the present applicant but other accused, who had used the accounts of the persons in question, for the purpose of laundering the money in question and whereas learned APP in this regard has drawn the attention of this Court to statement (1) Vahid Hanif Kanojiya, (2) Afzal Mustak Kureshi, (3) Muneer Nasirbhai Rathod, (4) Juned Ajit Saiyed and (5) Rafiq Ahmadbhi Pathan, and whereas it appears very clearly from the statements in question that the mule accounts were procured by the present applicant and not the other accused.
v. It also appears that one of the accounts in question, had been used to launder money, which were proceeds of the crime where the complainant had been digitally arrested.
vi. While it appears that the charge-sheet has been filed qua the applicants herein yet, as submitted by learned APP under instructions the investigation is on going, more particularly, appropriate orders in that regard having been Page 4 of 6 Uploaded by NAIR SMITA V.(HC00186) on Fri Feb 06 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 09 20:31:25 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/23589/2025 ORDER DATED: 02/02/2026 undefined obtained from the learned Magistrate more particularly, as regards considering the enormity on the crime in question.
vii. Having regard to the above, while it is attempted to be contended that the present applicant was not at all involved or may have been involved only in a small part of the entire conspiracy, yet to this Court it would appear that the present applicant played a very major role in the entire fraud in question.
viii. As noticed herein above, the present applicant was a party to the conversion of money, which were proceeds of Cyber crime into US dollars and having sent the US dollars to other co-accused, was an important cog in the entire machinery, whereas it also appears that some part of the money, is part of the proceeds, where a citizen had been digitally arrested and around Rs.19 crores extorted.
7. Considering the seriousness of the crime, and also the role attributed to the present applicant, more particularly, considering that the country is at present reeling under the onslaught of such Cyber crimes, which it could not be perpetuated without the help of such accused like the present applicant, to this Court the present application does not deserve any consideration.
Page 5 of 6 Uploaded by NAIR SMITA V.(HC00186) on Fri Feb 06 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 09 20:31:25 IST 2026NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/23589/2025 ORDER DATED: 02/02/2026 undefined
8. Hence the application is disposed of as rejected. Rule is discharged.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J) NAIR SMITA V./19-SB-I Page 6 of 6 Uploaded by NAIR SMITA V.(HC00186) on Fri Feb 06 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 09 20:31:25 IST 2026