J.B. Pardiwala, J.

1. Since the issues raised in both the writ applications are the same and the challenge is also to the selfsame first information report, those were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

2. For the sake of convenience, the Special Criminal Application No. 4758 of 2015 is treated as the lead matter.

3. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant-original accused has prayed for the following reliefs;

"(A) That the Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction quashing FIR No. 2 of 2015 registered with Gandhinagar Police Station, Gandhinagar Zone on 23.1.2015 and all proceedings consequent to the same;

(B) That pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to stay further proceedings of FIR No. 2 of 2015 registered with Gandhinagar Police Station, Gandhinagar Zone on 23.1.2015 and all proceedings consequent to the same;

(C) For such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

4. The case of the first informant may be summarized as under;

4.1 The first informant is engaged in the business of jewellery. The writ applicant is also engaged in the business of jewellery. The writ applicant herein is the Chairman and the Managing Director of a company by name Geetanjali Jewellery Retail Limited (for short GJRL). The writ applicant also owns one another company by the name Geetanjali Gems Ltd. (for short, "the GGL").

4.2 In the year 2010, one Mr. Kaushik Hariya, serving as a Business Development Manager with the GJRL and GGL, visited the residence of the first informant and persuaded him to take the franchisee of the company. Mr. Kaushik Hariya is said to have explained the modalities relating to the channel partner/franchisee. He also invited the first informant to have a meeting with the writ applicant herein being the chairman and the managing director of the GJRL and GGL. The first informant, accordingly, visited Mumbai and had a meeting with the writ applicant and other office bearers of the GJRL and GGL. The first informant was told that the company had an annual turnover of Rs. 1100 crore. It would be worth becoming a channel partner/franchisee in the State of Gujarat. The first informant was also provided with the figures of sales and profits to create confidence. The first informant gave a thought to the proposal and decided to enter into an agreement with the company of the writ applicant. The understanding arrived at was that whatever amount the first informant would send, the Company would buy the gold bars equivalent to the same in the name of Divyanirman Jewellers, i.e., the business concern of the first informant and the gold bars would remain in the possession of the accused in a fiduciary capacity as a deposit. It was also agreed between the parties that the accused would give 12% interest or margin, whichever is higher, as a minimum guarantee on the gold bars. The first informant was also told that all the expenses concerning the store would be borne by the company and the company alone would be responsible for the profit and loss and the role of the first informant would be merely one of an investor. At the end of the business relations, the gold bars, deposited, would be returned to the first informant without any delay or dispute.

4.3 It is alleged by the first informant that he transferred an amount of Rs. 22 crore by the RTGS to GJRL for the purchase of the gold bars. The transfer was effected from the account of his wife. It is alleged that between 2010 and 2013, the first informant transferred, in all, Rs. 21.28 crore by RTGS/cheque to the GJRL. In the year 2013-14, the first informant sent gold bars of the value of Rs. 1,76,81,500/- to the GJRL. In all, the first informant deposited through the GJRL, the gold bars worth Rs. 23,04,81,500/- and the value of the same, as on the date o