Gujarat High Court
Sanjaykumar Inderchand Agrawal vs State Of Gujarat on 27 June, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025
undefined
Reserved On : 17/06/2025
Pronounced On : 27/06/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 5305
of 2025
With
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 10055 of 2025
With
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 6701 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI Sd/-
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
========================================================== SANJAYKUMAR INDERCHAND AGRAWAL Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance:
MR VIRAT G POPAT(3710) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR. ANSHIN DESAI, LD. SR. ADV. WITH MR P P MAJMUDAR(5284) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR. JAY MEHTA, LD. ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI COMMON CAV JUDGMENT
1. Since the issue involved in all the captioned applications arises out of the very selfsame FIR, those were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent - State of Gujarat and learned advocate Mr. P.P. Majmudar waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the original complainant.
3. For the sake of convenience, Criminal Misc. Application Page 1 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined No.5305 is treated as the lead matter.
4. 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.11993007250131 of 2025 registered with Gandhidham 'B' Division Police Station, Kachchh for the alleged offences as mentioned in the FIR.
5. The glimpse of the case of the prosecution is that the First Information Report (henceforth 'FIR') has been lodged by the second respondent-original complainant on 08.02.2025 against the applicant alleging therein that he is having a Company in the name and style as 'Canon Trade Com. Pvt. Ltd.' being jointly run and managed by himself and his wife Santosh, which indulges in doing the work of Import/Export. It is stated in the FIR that the complainant is the Director in the said Company. It is further alleged that the Company of the complainant entered into an agreement with the Company of the applicant, namely, Vimla Resources F.Z.E., situated at Sharjah, U.A.E. being Sale-Purchase Contract No.Canon/24-25/02 dated 24.12.2024 as also Amendment No.1 was also done for export of coking coal which was imported by the complainant from the foreign country. It is alleged that it was agreed upon by both the sides in the said contract that as soon as the applicant would sell the product to any third party and receive any amount in his Bank Account at Dubai from the said third party purchaser, on the same day, the applicant will have to make the payment to the complainant in his H.D.F.C. Bank Account at Gandhidham. It is further alleged that as per the agreement, the complainant exported 27,300 metric tons of Brolga Hard Coking Coal to the Company of the Page 2 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined applicant, i.e, Vimla Resources F.Z.E. Sharjah at U.A.E. on 27.12.2024 from the Kandla port valued at INR 89,00,00,000/-, which had to be paid by the applicant to the Company of the complainant, as per the agreement. It is further alleged that, thereafter, on 29.01.2025, U.A.E. Currency AED 7,999,973.75/-
was credited in the U.A.E. Bank Account of the applicant, out of which, Bank Payment Advise of AED 7,000,000/-, i.e, INR 16,50,00,000/- was created in the H.D.F.C. Bank Account of the Complainant, and send the same in the Company related WhatApp Group, and an OTP Number of the same was obtained from the U.A.E. Mobile Number of the Company, and on the same day, U.A.E. Currency AED 7,856,090.75 was credited in the aforesaid H.D.F.C. Bank Account of the complainant. It is alleged that thereafter on 30.01.2025, the applicant changed the mobile number on which the complainant used to receive the OTPs, and registered his another mobile number, and thereby started to send the amount in the Bank Account of the Vimla Resources F.Z.E. Co. at U.A.E. It is alleged that the Bank Payment Advise of AED 7,000,000/- earlier created by the applicant got rejected by the applicant, and then on inquiry being made, it came to the knowledge of the complainant that one another Payment Advise was created by the applicant to transfer AED 1,53,00,000/-, i.e., INR 36,00,00,000/- in his sister concerned Company named Vimla Fuels & Metals Ltd., and as such, the Bank Account of Vimla Resources F.Z.E Company at U.A.E. got freezed by the complainant so that no transaction takes place from the said account. It is further alleged that then the complainant went to U.A.E., Dubai to see that he may get the payment of coking coal exported by him to the applicant's Company. It is alleged that even after the account got freezed, the applicant made certain Page 3 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined transactions and transferred amounts in the local Bank at U.A.E as also in the Bank Account of his sister concerned Company, namely, Vimla Fuels & Metals Ltd. At Gandhidham, and thereby committed an offence of cheating by not paying the amount of INR 36,00,00,000/- due and payable to him by the applicant towards the export of coking coal by the complainant to the applicant's Company. With this sort of allegations, the present FIR has been registered.
6. Thus, apprehending his 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.
7. Being aggrieved, the applicant is here before this Court with the present application.
8. Learned advocate Mr. Virat Popat 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 himself available during the course of investigation as well as the trial proceedings and will not flee from justice. He further submits that the applicant is a Director in Vimla Resources FZE, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates (VRF), which indulges in doing the business of import and export of coking coal as well as in Vimla Fuels & Metals Limited (VMFL), situated at Bhachau, which is a manufacturer, wholesaler and retailer in offering a finest quality collection of Anthracite Coal, Breeze Coke, Coal Fine, Coke Arsh, Steam Coal, Nut Coke, Pearl Coke, Petroleum Coke etc. Learned advocate Mr. Popat also submits that this is a second round of Page 4 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined litigation, and in the previous application filed by the applicant, the applicant was directed to appear before the investigating officer, and in compliance with the said direction, the applicant appeared before the investigating officer and his statement came to be recorded, however, simultaneously, the investigating officer was also directed to follow the dictum as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and in case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. Thereafter, all of a sudden, the investigating officer submitted an application on the basis of same set of materials for addition of Section 409 of the IPC, which indicates that by hook or crook, the investigating officer wants to arrest the present applicant.
9. Learned advocate Mr. Popat further submits that a bare perusal of the FIR clearly shows that the dispute involved in the present case is purely of a civil nature, which has been given a veneer of criminality with a view to exert pressure upon the applicant, which is nothing but an abuse of process of law. He further submits that present transaction is not the single transaction that has taken place between the applicant and the complainant, but there are number of transactions took place between the applicant's Company and the Company of the Complainant. Learned advocate Mr. Popat submits that the complainant and his wife Santosh are the Directors of Canon Tradecom Pvt. Ltd., situated at Gandhidham as well as are also the Directors in Narayani Coke Private Limited. The VMFL used to purchase coking coal from Narayani Coke Private Limited and Harsh Fuels Private Limited (the sister concern of Canon Tradecom Private Limited), and then used to sell the Page 5 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined same by exporting to KGC General Trading LLC, Dubai, who in turn used to sell the said material to VRF, who then used to sell the goods to Eventual Buyer viz. ESCO (Esfahan Steel Company), situated at Iran. He also submits that all the services like booking of vessels, entering into charter agreement, paying custom duty etc. were being done by the VFML. Learned advocate Mr. Popat submits that there are numerous transactions entered into between the Company of the applicant and the company of the complainant, and in all those transactions payment were being made by the applicant's Company after receiving the payment from the end user, which is evident from the statement of account/ledger account of Narayani Group maintained by VMFL. Thus, the ingredients of ill-intention right from the beginning to cheat the complainant is completely missing as numerous payments were being made by the applicant to the complainant.
10. Learned advocate Mr. Popat submits that amongst other various transactions, on 16.04.2024, the Company of the applicant, namely, VMFL entered into Sales Purchase Agreement with KGC for purchase and supply of 30,000 Metric tons of coking coal. Therefore, VMFL purchased the said coal from the Company of the Complainant, i.e, Narayani Group, which is evident from the Tax Invoices issued by Narayani Group on VMFL, which is annexed along with the memo of the application. As stated above, after receiving the material, KGC sold the said material to the Eventual Buyer, i.e, ESCO, Iran. However, when the said material reached to the Eventual Buyer, it found the material supplied to be of an inferior Page 6 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined quality, and therefore, vide letter dated 01.09.2024, rejected to accept the said material and refused to clear the payment towards the said material. The said lot is still lying at Bandar Imam Khomeini Port at Iran. Thus, in lieu of the said dispute, a Tripartite Agreement dated 16.01.2025 came to be executed between VFML, KGC and VRF, whereby it was agreed between the parties that the payment on behalf of KGC shall be made by VRF to VMFL directly. He, therefore, submits that in compliance of the terms of Tripartite Agreement dated 16.01.2025, VRF on behalf of KFC made payment of AED 1,53,00,000 (INR 36 Crores) into SBI Account of VMFL on 30.01.2025. However, as the SBI Account of VFML was irregular, SBI adjusted the payment of Rs. 36 Crores against overdue of Rs.38 Crores, and as such, it cannot be said that the transfer of Rs.36 Crores by the applicant as Director of VRF was with any ill-intention to avoid payment or to cheat the complainant.
11. Learned advocate Mr. Popat submits that thus the allegations of not making the payment to the complainant and of transferring the amount in the Bank Account of his another Company by the applicant are false and frivolous one made only with a view to exert pressure upon the applicant. Even there are number of transactions took place between the Company of the applicant and the Company of the complainant, and in pursuance of such transactions, the complainant was required to either replace the inferior quality of material or to reimburse the amount towards inferior quality of material, however, as the complainant did not do so, the Page 7 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined wife of the applicant, namely, Rakhi Sanjaykumar Agrawal gave a written complaint to the Gandidham 'B' Division Police Station against the wife of the complainant, daughter-in-law and other persons. However, because of political influence of the complainant, the FIR of the wife of the applicant was not registered, and as a counterblast to the said complaint, the present FIR has been registered.
12. Learned advocate Mr. Popat further submits that it is alleged in the FIR that the applicant's Company entered into an agreement with the Complainant's Company for supply of 27,300 metric tons of Brolga Hard Coking Coal, and subsequently, an Addendum-01 was also executed. However, the said allegations are completely false and frivolous one as neither any Addendum-01 is executed between the parties nor signed by the applicant. Moreover, it is also alleged in the FIR that payment had to be made to the complainant on the very same day when the applicant received the amount from the end user, which is false and contrary to the terms of the Agreement. As per Clause-6 of the Agreement, the payment was to be made within 60 days from the date of shipment, and without waiting for the said period of 60 days, the present FIR has been filed by the complainant. Further as per Clause-12 of the Agreement, in case of any dispute being arisen between the parties, the same shall be resolved through Arbitrator. Thus, there is a clear cut breach of terms of Agreement mutually executed between the parties. He submits that the complainant, instead of resolving the dispute through Arbitrator or initiating any civil proceedings, straightway has Page 8 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined filed the present FIR, which is nothing but an arm twisting tactics. Learned advocate Mr. Popat further submits that the amount of Rs.36 Crores was set-off by the applicant in lieu of the payment which were to be recovered by the applicant from the complainant on account of inferior quality of material supplied by the complainant vide Sales Purchase Agreement dated 16.04.2024. Thus from the above, it appears that allegations made in the FIR are false, fabricated and got up. The applicant has neither induced nor deceived the complainant. The applicant has not committed criminal breach of trust or cheating. Thus, if the entire allegations, levelled in the FIR, are taken as it is, then, no case is made out against the applicant. To fortify his submissions, learned advocate Mr. Popat has relied upon the decision in the case of Delhi Race Club (1940) Limited & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., reported in (2024) 19 SCC 690.
13. In such circumstances, referred to above, learned advocate Mr. Popat prays that there being merit in his application, the same be allowed and the applicant be released on anticipatory bail.
14. Per contra, the present application has been opposed by learned senior advocate Mr. Anshin Desai assisted by learned advocate Mr. Panthil Majmudar appearing for the original complainant. Learned senior advocate Mr. Desai submits that the offence committed by the applicant is quite grave and serious in nature wherein huge volume of amount is alleged to have been cheated by the applicant. Learned senior advocate Mr. Desai further submits that as the applicant and the Page 9 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined complainant were dealing in the same business, they came into contact and entered into business relationship, and then started doing the business with each other. The first transaction took place between the applicant and the complainant in the year 2017, and till 2023-24, the complainant was dealing with the applicant on cash and carry basis. However, then, the applicant successfully gained the trust of the complainant, and therefore, the complainant started to supply the material of coal on credit terms. Learned senior advocate Mr. Desai further submits that before entering into the contract/agreement dated 24.12.2024 for supply of 27,300 metric tons of coal, for the purpose of transparency, it was mutually agreed that till completion of all contractual obligations, all transactions OTP for the Bank Account at U.A.E will be generated on the complainant's Dubai Mobile Number, and accordingly, the complainant's mobile number of Dubai was registered, and the complainant was also given the viewing rights for the said Bank Account at U.A.E. He also submits that on 24.12.2024, a sales purchase agreement being No.Canon/24-25/02, came to be executed between the Company of the applicant and the Company of the complainant along with Addendum No.01, whereby it was agreed that the imported coking coal of 27,300 metric tons being Brolga Hard Coking Coal with a contract value of AED 37,674,000.00, i.e, INR 89,00,00,000/- on Free on Board (FOB) basis of the Complainant's Company, would be exported to the applicant's Company at Sharjah, U.A.E, and the same will be sold by the applicant's Company there and the pre-decided sale consideration amount which would be deposited in the Page 10 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined applicant's Company's Bank Account in Dubai, will be transferred in the HDFC Bank Account of the Complainant's Company on the same day which is situated at Gandhidham.
15. Learned senior advocate Mr. Desai further submits that the amount of AED 37,674,000, i.e, INR 89,00,00,000/- was to be deposited by the applicant's Company to the Company of the complainant, and on 29.01.2025, the amount of AED 7,999,973.75/- was credited in the Bank Account of the applicant's Company in Dubai, out of which, the applicant sent the Bank Payment Advise for the amount of AED 7,000,000/-, i.e, INR 16,50,00,000/- in favour of the Company of the complainant and shared the said payment advise in the WhatsApp group and also the OTP of the same was also received on the U.A.E. Mobile number of the complainant, and also on the same day, further amount of AED 7,856,090.75/- was credited in the applicant's Company's Bank Account in Dubai. Learned senior advocate Mr. Desai also submits that instead of crediting the further amount in the Bank Account of the complainant, the applicant not only rejected the earlier Bank Payment Advise of the amount of Rs.7,000,000/- but also created another Bank Payment Advise of the amount of AED 1,53,00,000/-, i.e, INR 36,00,00,000/- in the Bank Account of its sister concern Company, i.e, Vimla Fuels & Metals Ltd. He further submits that the complainant was at Jaipur on 29.01.2025 and 30.01.2025 to attend the wedding, where the applicant was also supposed to come. However, the complainant did not find the applicant over there, and therefore, made a phone call to the applicant and found that Page 11 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined the applicant misguided the complainant and actually he was in Dubai, and thus, the said conduct of the applicant clearly shows that there was an ill-intention on the part of the applicant to cheat the complainant.
16. Learned senior advocate Mr. Desai submits that the applicant, behind the back of the complainant, reached Dubai and changed the mobile number of the complainant on which the complainant was receiving the OTPs. However, as per the U.A.E. banking law, while replacing the existing mobile number for OTP purpose to a new number, the Bank must send a confirmation OTP to the existing number, however, in the present case, the complainant has not received any message from the Bank. He further submits that then the complainant himself went to Dubai on 01.02.2025 and approached the Bank so as to stop such irregularities. The complainant also tried to meet the applicant, however, the same was in vain. The complainant also got the account in Dubai freezed to stop the fraudulent transaction of AED 1,53,00,000/-, however, despite such efforts being made by the complainant, the applicant got the amount of AED 1,53,00,000/- (INR 36 Crores) transferred in the Bank Account of its sister concern Company, namely, Vimla Fuels & Metals Ltd. by different transactions through their local group companies' bank accounts. Learned senior advocate Mr. Desai further submits that the applicant had submitted incomplete contract agreement executed between them and the amended agreement was not produced before the court below by the applicant, and the same was produced by the investigating officer along with its affidavit, which indicates Page 12 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined that the applicant had the intention to cheat the complainant from the very inception. Not only that, the applicant has also mislead the trial court by producing incomplete agreement. He further submits that as per the amended agreement, which is produced on record by the complainant, the effective date of the amended agreement shall be from 24.12.2024 and as per the amended agreement terms of payment, (a) immediately upon receipt of the payment from the third party in the applicant's Bank Account in Dubai, the same has to be transferred on the same day to the Bank Account of the Company of the complainant. He submits that the applicant, being a merchant, has committed the offence of criminal breach of trust by changing the mobile number of the complainant, and as such, ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 316(5) are clearly spelt out.
17. Learned advocate Mr. Desai submits that after the registration of the FIR, the complainant herein made an inquiry from the end user as to whether they have received any goods supplied by the applicant, upon which, a correspondence was made by the end user through email, a copy of which is also place on record, which shows that in fact due to some technical errors, that agreement could not be executed between the applicant and the end user, and therefore, no goods were supplied to them by the applicant. Thus, it appears that there was no contract executed between the applicant and the end user and there was no actual supply of goods by the applicant to the end user, and therefore, the applicant has disclosed wrong facts before this Court and Page 13 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined suppressed the true facts, which clearly shows that there was a mens rea on the part of the applicant to deceive the complainant.
18. Leaned advocate Mr. Desai further submits that, in fact, a statement is made at bar that there is no Addendum No.1 being made and that the applicant has not signed any such Addendum No.1, to which, learned senior advocate Mr. Desai has drawn the attention of this Court to the grounds raised by the applicant in the memo of the application before the trial court, more particularly, Ground No.6, and submits that there was an admission on the part of the applicant that subsequently the said document had been executed between him and the complainant, and therefore, quite contrary stand is taken by the applicant with a sole intention to get the favourable order.
19. Learned senior advocate Mr. Desai submits that similar kinds of grievances have been raised by the other entities against the applicant, the list of which, has also been produced by the complainant along with the affidavit, and thus, it can be said that the applicant is habitual in committing such kind of offence. Learned senior advocate Mr. Desai further submits that there is enough oral electronic evidence to suggest that the applicant has committed the present offence very deliberately with a view to dupe the complainant. Ample evidence has been collected by the investigating officer so far, establishing the nexus between the applicant and the commission of the crime, and to negate and stall the investigation, a deliberate attempt is made by the applicant by Page 14 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined filing the present application to subvert the issue and to conceal the facts which would make the picture more clear. He also submits that the present offence is quite serious in nature, involving huge volume of amount and the investigation is yet not completed and is at a very crucial stage. Moreover, the applicant is absconding, and there are all chances of he being fled away as he is having Company at Dubai. Moreover, the applicant was served with the notice under Section 35(3), however, he has chosen not to appear before the investigating officer, and thereby evading and avoiding the cooperation in the investigation. He submits that there is a strong prima facie case against the applicant. The offence alleged against the applicant is a non-bailable offence. Thus, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the present case, as well as the allegations of misappropriation of huge volume of amount, the presence of the applicant is very much necessary while conducting the investigation.
20. In such circumstances, referred to above, learned senior advocate Mr. Desai prays that there being no merit in the present application, the same be rejected.
21. The present application has also been opposed by learned APP Mr. Jay Mehta. Learned APP submits that the present applicant has been named in the FIR along with his specific role. He further submits that there are similar kind of complaints against the applicant by the different entities, and therefore, considering the allegations made in the FIR and the role attributed to the applicant, discretion should not be exercised in favour of the applicant at this stage.
Page 15 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined
22. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record.
23 It goes without saying that the alleged offence of misappropriating crores of rupees of the complainant 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.
24. 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 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 Page 16 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined 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"
25. 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.
26. 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.
27. 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 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 Page 17 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined 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."
28. 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;
[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;Page 18 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined [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; "
29. 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 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."
30. Coming to the case on hand, from the allegations levelled in the FIR and the materials placed on record, it appears that Page 19 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined the present case does not fall within the category to be of civil nature only. There prima facie appears to be the elements of criminality in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case. In the present case, 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, the accused is not entitled to anticipatory bail. Moreover, learned advocate for the complainant has also placed on record certain documents, indicating that there was no contract or agreement executed between the applicant and the end user, and no actual supply of goods had taken place. Further, the complainant has also brought to the notice of the Court the admission on the part of the applicant before the trial court of being entered into Addendum No.1 with the complainant, which clearly falsifies the claim of the applicant that he has not signed or executed any such Addendum No.1.
31. 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. Here in the case on hand, the entire case of the prosecution hinges upon documentary evidences in physical as well as in digital format, and as such, the apprehension of tampering with the evidence cannot be discarded at this stage. The presence of the applicant seems to Page 20 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 undefined 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. One more apprehension of applicant being fled away also cannot be ignored, as he is having business entities in U.A.E. Moreover, as stated by the learned advocate for the applicant, this is a second round of litigation for the same relief, and in my view, the same should not be entertained unless there is some change of circumstances or other grounds exist which would justify the consideration of second application.
32. 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.
33. 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 Page 21 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/5305/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/06/2025 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.
34. In the result, all the applications, being devoid of any merit, are hereby rejected. However, it is made clear that the observations made by this Court herein above at this stage while deciding the anticipatory bail applications, would not come in the way of the applicants 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 applications, if preferred by the applicants. Rule is discharged.
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J) VAHID Page 22 of 22 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:40:30 IST 2025