Gujarat High Court
Vina Vijaybhai Tuli vs State Of Gujarat on 14 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2575/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 2575
of 2025
==========================================================
VINA VIJAYBHAI TULI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MALAV M MULANI(8844) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HK PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 14/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
Ms. Monica Agrawal, learned advocate submits that she has instructions to appear on behalf of the complainant.
She is permitted to file her appearance.
1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.
2. By way of the present application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), the applicant accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11191011250003 of 2025 registered with DCB Crime Police Station, Ahmedabad City for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC") / The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short Page 1 of 6 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Fri Feb 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 15 03:17:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/2575/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/02/2025 undefined "BNS") and Section 3 and 4 of the GPID Act.
3. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and he is falsely implicated in the offence. It is alleged that the applicant was in contact with the complainant, Jignisha Mistry, an LIC agent. The complainant claims that Accused Nos. 1 and 2, directors of Tenscope Management, a stock market business, lured the complaiannt into investing in an IPO, promising a 40- 60% return. Trusting them, she transferred ₹1,88,95,000 to the1,88,95,000 to the company's ICICI Bank account. It is further case of the complainant that the said money is not returned to the complainant and no investment is made in the stock market as promise made by the accused. It is submitted that the applicant is completely unaware of the transaction with Accused No. 1 and has not participated in the alleged offense. Furthermore, the applicant is the mother of Accused No. 1 and is neither a director nor a stakeholder in the company. It is further submitted that, considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be granted bail with the imposition of suitable conditions.
4. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State and learned advocate appearing for the complainant have opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. It is submitted that the applicant is directly involved in the offence and she lured the complainant for investing in an IPO, promising a 40-60% return. Trusting them, she transferred ₹1,88,95,000 to the1,88,95,000 to the company's ICICI Bank account. Thus, the Page 2 of 6 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Fri Feb 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 15 03:17:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/2575/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/02/2025 undefined applicant is habitual in committing such kind of offences. Therefore, the present application may be dismissed.
7. Having heard the learned advocate for the parties and perusing the investigation papers, it is equally incumbent upon the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously, cautiously and strictly in compliance with the basic principles laid down in a plethora of decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court on the point. It is well settled that, among other circumstances, the factors to be borne in mind while considering an application for bail are (i) the nature and gravity of the accusation; (ii) the antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether he has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence; (iii) the possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; and (iv) where the accusation has been made with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by having him so arrested. Though at the stage of granting bail an elaborate examination of evidence and detailed reasons touching the merit of the case, which may prejudice the accused, should be avoided. I have considered the following aspects.
1. It is alleged in the complaint that the applicant was in contact with the complainant, Jignisha Mistry, an LIC agent. The complainant claims that Accused Nos. 1 and 2, directors of Tenscope Management, a stock market business, lured the complainant into investing in an IPO, promising a 40-60% return. Trusting them, the complainant transferred ₹1,88,95,000 to the1,88,95,000 to the company's ICICI Bank account and the said money is not returned to Page 3 of 6 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Fri Feb 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 15 03:17:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/2575/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/02/2025 undefined the complainant and no investment is made in the stock market as promise made by the accused.
2. Prima facie, it appears that the allegations are solely against the directors of the company, Accused Nos. 1 and 2, who are the son and daughter-in-law of the present applicant.
3. Upon perusal of the ROC records, it appears that Tenscope Management was incorporated on June 24, 2021, with Accused Nos. 1 and 2 as its directors. There are no direct allegations or nexus against the applicant.
4. The applicant is lady accused and nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the present applicant.
5. It is alleged that various complaints have been lodged against the present applicant, but they are yet to be inquired into and she is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
8. Considering the aforesaid aspects and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. reported in (2011) 1 SCC 6941, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. reported in (1980) 2 SCC 665 and also the decision in the case of Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, I am inclined to allow the present application.
9. In the result, the present application is allowed by directing that in the event of arrest / appearance of the applicant in Page 4 of 6 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Fri Feb 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 15 03:17:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/2575/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/02/2025 undefined connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11191011250003 of 2025 registered with DCB Crime Police Station, Ahmedabad City the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions that applicant :
(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required;
(b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 22/02/2025 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. and the IO shall ensure that no unnecessary harassment or inconvenience is caused to the applicant;
(c) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;
(d) shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;
(e) shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the investigating officer and the court concerned and shall not change his residence till the final disposal of the case till further orders;
(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the Court and if having passport shall deposit the same before the Trial Court within a week;
(g) an order of anticipatory bail does not in any manner limit or restrict the rights or duties of the police or investigative agency, to investigate into the charges against the applicant;
(h) It is open to the police or the investigating agency to move the learned trial Court for a direction under Section 483(2) to arrest the accused, in the event of Page 5 of 6 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Fri Feb 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 15 03:17:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/2575/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/02/2025 undefined violation of any term, such as absconding, non-
cooperating during investigation, evasion, intimidation or inducement to witnesses with a view to influence outcome of the investigation or trial, etc.-
10. At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.
11. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Application is disposed of accordingly. Direct service is permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) ALI Page 6 of 6 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Fri Feb 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 15 03:17:44 IST 2025