IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
GITA GOPI, J.
Jayeshbhai S/o Lilabhai Ranchhodbhai Patoliya – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
R/Criminal Misc.Application No.15859, 15872 of 2022
Decided on : 21-10-2022
GPID Act - Bail Application - Section 439 of CrPC - Sections 409, 420 r/w 114 of IPC and Section 3 of GPID Act - [Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 of GPID Act] - The court allowed the bail application under Section 439 of CrPC in connection with the FIR registered under Sections 409, 420 r/w 114 of IPC and Section 3 of GPID Act. The court considered the provisions of the GPID Act, which provide for attaching the money, property, or assets of the Financial Establishment and the appointment of a Competent Authority to ensure repayment to the depositors. The court exercised discretion in favor of the applicants, considering the seized properties and an undertaking to deposit a specified amount to the trial court.
Fact of the Case:
The applicants filed for regular bail under Section 439 of CrPC in connection with an FIR registered under Sections 409, 420 r/w 114 of IPC and Section 3 of GPID Act. The applicants were accused of cheating and misappropriation of funds in an investment scheme.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the bail application, considering the seized properties and an undertaking to deposit a specified amount to the trial court.
Issues: The issues raised by the court included the attachment of funds, property, or assets of the Financial Establishment and the appointment of a Competent Authority in accordance with the GPID Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the provisions of the GPID Act, which provide for attaching the money, property, or assets of the Financial Establishment and the appointment of a Competent Authority to ensure repayment to the depositors.
Final Decision: The court allowed the bail application and ordered the release of the applicants on regular bail, subject to specified conditions.
ORDER :
1. Since both the captioned applications are arising out the common F.I.R., those were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common order.
2. These applications have been filed under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for regular bail in connection with the F.I.R. being C.R.No.11203004220360 of 2022 registered with ‘C’ Division Junagadh Police Station, District - Junagadh, for offences punishable under sections-409, 420 r/ w.114 of I.P.C. and Section-3 of G.P.I.D. Act.
3. Heard Mr. Nirupam Nanavati, learned senior counsel alongwith Mr. Jagdish Satapara, learned advocate appearing for the applicants and Mr. Pranav Trivedi, learned APP appearing for the respondent – State.
4. Mr. Nanavati, learned senior counsel for the applicants submits that E.S.P.N. Global Company is situated at Dubai, which is not accused in the matter and accordingly, the applicant of Cri.M.A. No.15859 of 2022 had become the agent and he had himself invested in the company. As per the scheme of E.S.P.N. Global Company, the person who become the agent after his investment would receive profit on its returns and as promised by the Company, the commission would be paid in the member’s account. As per complaint, Mr. Nanavati submits that the complainant and all other members had received returns on their investment on regular basis, but later on, they could not receive even applicants and other victims did not receive money after March, 2022 and therefore, it is submitted by Mr. Nanavati that the applicant of Cri.M.A. No.15859 of 2022 had lodged a complaint against the Director viz. Karan Dwivedi @ Chandan Dwivedi before the Puna Police Station, Surat on 07.04.2022 and the Director – Karan Dwivedi assured all the members through telegram that the profit returns and commission would be transferred shortly in the members’ account. Mr. Nanavati thus submitted that there was no intention to dupe any persons or harm the interest of any of the members of the company. Mr. Nanavati further submits that almost all the properties of the applicant of Cri.M.A. No.15872 of 2022 have been seized by the police during the course of investigation and submitted that the amount could be recovered by the authority concerned under provisions of the G.P.I.D. Act. It was, therefore, prayed that the present application may be allowed and the applicant herein may also be released on regular bail.
5. By order dated 10.10.2022, the police was asked to produce a report in terms of the issues raised by this Court and today, learned APP Mr. Pranav Trivedi produced a report of the Police Sub Inspector, ‘C’ Division Police Station, Junagadh. The report suggests that about 03 plots; 01 open land, and 01 car of Maheshbhai Kalubhai Ranpariya Patel have been seized and 01 car of applicant of Cri.M.A. No.15859 of 2022 has been seized. The value of the property has been approximately noted in the report. Mr. Trivedi, learned APP submitted that as per the prosecution case, the applicant of Cri.M.A. No.15859 of 2022 had initially joined the E.S.P.N. Global Company, whose CEO is Karan Dwivedi @ Chandan Dwivedi, who had explained the road-map of the investment to the said accused and according to scheme, to open an account, ETP token or Crypto Coin Ethereum or Tron would be necessary and after having account in the company, weekly ETP token would be deposited in the investor’s account and further, for withdrawal of ETP token, Crypto Coin Ethereum or Tron would be converted or new account would be formed and accordingly, ETP tokens would be given for investment in the company. Mr. Pranav, learned APP further submitted that there would not be any dealing of cash transaction. For forming the account in the company, 07 accounts ranging from 50 ETP to 6350 ETP would be found and ETP tokens would be deposited in the account and thereafter, on the side of left and right, another accounts would be created to form the main account and commission would be paid through the ETP tokens.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's consideration of the provisions of the GPID Act in granting bail and ensuring repayment to the depositors.
The court established that the severity of financial crimes and the potential for flight are critical factors in bail considerations under the Criminal Procedure Code.
The court has the discretion to grant bail after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merit of the case.
The court denied bail based on the serious nature of the charges, the applicant's criminal history, and his role as a beneficiary in a significant fraud scheme.
Bail cannot be granted when there is substantial evidence of fraud, a significant flight risk, and a history of similar offenses by the petitioner.
It is made clear that these observations are only for purpose of disposal of present bail applications, and will not prejudice parties in trial.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of complying with the conditions of bail and the court's reliance on evidence of money trail in reaching its decision.
The main legal point established is the consideration of the petitioner's limited role, conduct, and efforts in granting bail, emphasizing the need for a fair trial.
The court emphasizes the presumption of innocence and the need for substantial evidence to justify detention pending trial.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.