Gujarat High Court
Moiuddin @ Moin Bapu Yasinmiya Saiyed vs State Of Gujarat on 21 March, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/5745/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/03/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 5745 of 2025
==========================================================
MOIUDDIN @ MOIN BAPU YASINMIYA SAIYED
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
SAQUIB S ANSARI(7152) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS DIVYANGNA JHALA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 21/03/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The applicant has filed this Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for enlarging the applicant on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11201002240011 of 2024 registered with CID Crime, Ahmedabad Zone Police Station, District:Ahmedabad City for the offences punishable under Sections 489A, 489B, 489C, 489D, 34, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Saquib S. Ansari appearing for the applicant and learned APP Ms.Divyangna Jhala for the Respondent - State.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that in the present offence, investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. The present applicant has been arrested in connection with the present offence on 14.6.2024 and since then the applicant is in custody.
Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by MANSHI HARISHBHAI AMIN(HC01561) on Tue Mar 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 25 22:12:35 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5745/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/03/2025 undefined 3.1 Earlier the applicant had filed Criminal Misc. Application No.20955 of 2024 which came to be dismissed by this court vide order dated 24.10.2024. In the said order this court had referred to the statement of the wife of the co-accused who had identified the present applicant and had stated that the applicant had gone to her house to meet her husband, who is the co-accused.
3.2 After the aforesaid application was dismissed by this court, the wife of the co-accused namely Monika Satishkumar Jinwa has affirmed an affidavit wherein she has stated that the police officials from Gujarat had gone to her house on 16.6.2024 and they had shown her the photograph of one person, who had beard, and had instructed her to state in the statement that the person in the photograph used to come to her place and meet her husband. She was also threatened that if she did not state what she was asked to state, she would be booked in a false case. Thus, the statement of the wife of the co-accused was recorded by the police officials under threat. There is a change in circumstances after the earlier bail application filed by the applicant was dismissed by this court.
3.2 He also submitted that the present applicant and the other co-accused have also filed Special Criminal Application before this court praying for inquiry into the allegations made by the said Monika in her affidavit. He submitted that the investigation of the offence has not been carried out in a free and fair manner by the investigating agency. He, therefore, submitted to allow the present application and enlarge the present applicant on bail subject to suitable conditions.
Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by MANSHI HARISHBHAI AMIN(HC01561) on Tue Mar 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 25 22:12:35 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5745/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/03/2025 undefined
4. The application is opposed by learned APP contending that the applicant herein has tried to tamper with the evidence of the prosecution and has made the prosecution witnesses namely Monika to file an affidavit which has been pressed into service by the applicant. Moreover, the present is the successive bail application filed by the applicant and since there has been no change in circumstances, the application is not maintainable. She therefore submitted to dismiss the present application.
5. This Court has considered the submissions canvassed by learned advocates for the parties and has also perused the material placed on record. At the outset, it is required to be noted that this is the third successive application filed by the applicant seeking regular bail in the present offence. The applicant had earlier preferred Criminal Misc. Application No.14298 of 2024 which was dismissed by this court vide order dated 26.7.2024. Thereafter the applicant had preferred another application being Criminal Misc. Application No.20955 of 2024 which also came to be dismissed by this court vide order dated 24.10.2024. While dismissing the said application, this court had observed as under.
"5. This Court has considered the submissions canvassed by learned advocates for the parties and has also perused the material placed on record. Earlier the applicant had filed Criminal Misc. Application No.14298 of 2024 which was dismissed vide order dated 26.7.2024. while dismissing the said application this court in its order, in particular para 5, has observed as under.
"Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the record. As per the case of prosecution, a secret information was received by the police authorities that the present applicant had called for counterfeit currency notes through the other co-accused and on Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by MANSHI HARISHBHAI AMIN(HC01561) on Tue Mar 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 25 22:12:35 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5745/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/03/2025 undefined the basis of the said secret information, the co-accused had been intercepted and they were also found in possession of various counterfeit currency notes. Moreover, the investigation papers indicates that the present applicant had gone to Rajasthan to the place of one Satish, who is the co-accused in the present offence. The statement of the wife of the said Satish has also been recorded to the effect that the present applicant had visited her house."
5.1 From the record it appears that it was the present applicant who had guided the main accused namely Satish for printing of the counterfeit currency notes."
5.1 There is material against the present applicant on record in the form of statement of the wife of the co-accused Satish. From the record it appears that on 16.6.2024, the investigating agency had gone to her place and had recorded her statement. During the course of her statement, she was shown the photograph of the applicant and after seeing the photograph, she had stated that the applicant used to come to her place and meet her husband.
5.2 It is the case of prosecution that it was the present applicant who had imparted knowledge of printing counterfeit currency notes to the other co-accused Satish. After her statement was recorded in the month of June, 2024, witness Monika has now turned up with an affidavit dated 22.2.2025 wherein she has stated that on 16.6.2024, the Gujarat Police Officials had come to her place and had shown her the photograph of one person with beard. She was informed by the police officials that she should state in her statement that the person in the photograph used to come to her place and meet her husband namely Atik. She was further warned by the police Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by MANSHI HARISHBHAI AMIN(HC01561) on Tue Mar 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 25 22:12:35 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5745/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/03/2025 undefined not to mention anything beyond this and if she states something else, her husband and herself would be embroiled in a false case. She did not know the person in photograph. She came to know later that his name was Moiuddin @ Moin Bapu Yasinmiya Saiyed and is also arraigned as the accused in this offence along with her husband. The police had also obtained her signatures on blank papers.
5.3 It has taken period of more than eight months for witness Monika to come up with these facts. This itself creates doubt about the credibility of the contents of the said affidavit. This also reflects on the conduct on the part of the present applicant. This is nothing but tampering with the case of prosecution. The applicant herein has made an attempt to win over the prosecution witnesses. Therefore there is a strong apprehension that if the applicant is ordered to be enlarged on bail, he may try to win over the prosecution witness and cause damage to the case of prosecution. The applicant appears to have taken recourse to unfair means to get the favourable order of bail in his favour.
6. Considering all these aspects, no case is made out to exercise discretion in favour of the applicant. Accordingly, the present Application is dismissed with the cost of Rs.10,000/- which shall be paid by the present applicant to the Gujarat High Court Legal Services Authority within a period of fifteen days from today.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J) Manshi Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by MANSHI HARISHBHAI AMIN(HC01561) on Tue Mar 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 25 22:12:35 IST 2025