SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Guj) 505

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J. C. Doshi, J.
Jagdishbhai Madhubhai Narola – Applicant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
R/Criminal Misc.Application (For Successive Anticipatory Bail) No. 7152 of 2024
Decided On : 23-04-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Applicant : Mr BM Mangukiya, Ms Bela A Prajapati
For the Respondent: Mr HK Patel, Addl. Public Prosecutor

IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power of anticipatory bail should be exercised sparingly, especially in economic offences, and should be granted only in exceptional cases. Additionally, a substantive change in circumstances is required to entertain a successive bail application.

Headnote:

Anticipatory Bail - Criminal Offence - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 438 - 2021(16) SCC 725, 2011 SCC Online Guj 6224

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in connection with an FIR related to a cryptocurrency scam where innocent persons were duped of around Rs. 42 lakhs. The petitioner was alleged to be actively involved in promoting the fraudulent company and was accused of duping innocent persons.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner's role was equal to the main accused and that there was no change in circumstances to warrant a successive bail application. The court also emphasized the need to balance personal liberty with societal interests, especially in economic offences, and dismissed the petition.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner should be granted anticipatory bail in light of the allegations of his active involvement in the cryptocurrency scam.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the power of anticipatory bail should be exercised sparingly, especially in economic offences, and should be granted only in exceptional cases. The court also emphasized the need for a substantive change in circumstances to entertain a successive bail application.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition for anticipatory bail, emphasizing the need to balance personal liberty with societal interests and the importance of allowing the investigating agency sufficient freedom in the process of investigation.

ORDER :

1. By way of the present successive anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in case of his arrest in connection with the FIR registered as C.R.No.11193063230003 registered with Cyber Crime Police Station, Rajkot.

2.1 The FIR is lodged by Mr. Rashminbhai Pramodsinh Pathiyar against seven persons. The petitioner is arraigned as accused no.5 in the said FIR. In the said FIR, the first informant claimed that before about 4½ years, Mr. Pankaj Jitendra Gohil of town Damnagar was polishing diamond at the factory of his father and thereafter there was a development of friendship with the first informant. However, after sometime the said person stopped working with the first informant and had gone to Surat. Before about 1½ year, said Mr. Pankaj Gohil visited the first informant at his residence and informed that he wanted to constitute and incorporate one company named and called as Ignite Game. It was also informed that, if anybody invest money in the said company, one would receive good returns. Said Mr.Pankaj Gohil also informed the first informant that he has two four wheel cars and has his own residence and has several other amenities. The first informant stated that he asked Mr. Pankaj Gohil about the sum, where Mr. Pankaj Gohil informed that, he alongwith his friend Mr. Hardik Vijay Vaghela, resident of Bhavnagar, have joined hands.

2.2 Mr. Hardik Vaghela was the Software Developer and he proposed to float Crypto Currency in the name of Ignite Game. Mr. Hardik Gohil informed that he has already prepared a software. It is the say of the first informant that said Mr. Hardik Gohil informed that alongwith Mr. Ganesh Bipin Joshi and Mr. Kalpesh of village Juvadar, Taluka Gadhada; Mr. Kalpesh Vasoya of village Halasiya; Mr. Satish Pratap Joshi Gol, resident of Timbarla, Santrampur, Panchmahal; Mr. Jagdish Madhubhai Narola, petitioner herein and Mr. Ghanshyam Vinubhai Nadoda are the partners in the said company. Since Mr. Hardik Vaghela, who is the Software Developer, is the partner, if the first informant invests money in the said company, he would get good returns. Relying upon said statement of Mr. Pankaj Gohil, Mr. Jayraj Barad; Mr. Praap Parmar; Mr. Vishnu Pari Goswami; Mr. Jayraj Parmar and Mr. Raj Dixit agreed to invest the money in Ignite Game. The first informant was informed that the investment made would be double within a period of 10 months and when anybody needs the money back, no cash would be paid, but same would be repaid in US DT, Bit Coin, BNB, TRON, ETHERIUM and BELIVER. The first informant was informed that all aforestated are the Crypto Currency and it will be converted as per the instruction of the investor. The first informant was inclined to invest the money, however, he had no knowledge about the Crypto Currency and, therefore, the first informant was informed that the first informant may pay him cash and he would login with the password and ID and he can see his balance of Crypto Currency on his ID with password. He was further informed that the ID would be only provided on the investment of 100 USDT. Therefore, the first informant and his brother Mr. Karansinh had paid money of Rs.3.20 lakhs in July, 2021; Rs.5 lakhs on July 25, 2021; Rs. 5 lakhs; Rs.10 lakhs on August 22, 2021; Rs. 5 lakhs on September 09, 2021; Rs.7 lakhs on September 28, 2021; Rs.6.40 lakhs on October 15, 2021; Rs.5.40 lakhs on November 10, 2021, in all paid Rs.42 lakhs at his residence at Damnagar and, therefore, there were 552 different IDs in the name of the first informant. The first informant further stated that by using his ID with password, the first informant would be able to see the balance of his Crypto Currency. However, before about five months from the date of lodging of the FIR, Mr. Pankaj Gohil was not picking up his mobile phone and he was not able to be contacted. Therefore, as per the first informant,

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

          Please visit our Training & Support
          Center or Contact Us for assistance

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon Back to top