The court cannot grant anticipatory bail to an applicant residing outside the jurisdiction without evidence of cooperation with ongoing investigations.

ORDER :

1. The applicant, who is apprehending arrest at the hands of Udhna Police, Dist. Surat has preferred this application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of BNS S , 2023. The FIR came to be registered by way of C.R. No. 11210047251103 of 2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 316 (5), 318(4), 351(2), 61(2), 317(2) of the , 2023, Section 66 (D) of the IT Act and Section 3 of the GPID Act, 2003.

2. The applicant is mentioned as accused no. 4 in the FIR. There are other 5 co-accused also named with the applicant in the said FIR.

3. The original complainant Parth Vasantbhai Khadela by way of his FIR has stated that, he came in contact with Meet Khokhar (accused no. 1) before four years at a marriage function and thereafter, they started meeting frequently. In the year 2022, the original complainant had gone to Udhna at his friend Ravibhai Nathani’s office, when he had received a call from Meet Khokhar, who had asked him to meet. The original complainant had given Ravibhai’s office address to Meet, pursuant to which, he had come to Ravibhai’s office. Meet had informed him that, he along with his maternal uncle Vishal Sankdasaria (accused no. 2) and Vishal Sankdasaria’s brother-in-law Vishal Limbani (accused no. 3) along with his friend Ankur Patel i.e. the present applicant, were doing business in the forex market. Meet had further informed him that, by working as an agent in the said business, he was earning huge commission and, there was huge profit in Forex and Robo trading business. Meet had assured the original complainant that, if he would invest in Forex trading, he i.e. Meet would ensure that, he would earn a profit of around 7% to 8% per month. The original complainant had pleaded ignorance as regards the said business before Meet, to which Meet had assured him that, he should not worry and should only look at his profit. Meet had also told him that he was having a large expert team, which had occasioned huge profits to various investors. They also had an office in Dubai and his employees namely Mihir Shah (accused no. 5) and Piyush Kukadiya (accused no. 6) would provide him information as regards Forex trading. Saying so, Meet had asked for Rs. 2 lakhs towards token amount to be invested in Forex trading, however, the original complainant did not have the said amount. As such, he had given Rs.50000/- and had borrowed Rs. 1,50,000/- from his friend Ravibhai Nathani, and accordingly had deposited the said amount in an office named R.J. Jewellery, pursuant to which, Meet had prepared a Forex account for trading in Forex market on the server of broker EONE FX bearing I.D. No. 7946224. The original complainant was also made to download an application MT-5, wherein, he saved his id-password. Meet had also told him that, after filling up the id password in his mobile application, he would be able to see the profit and loss as against his investments, however, he was not to enter into any transactions since, it would be Meet’s team who would be looking after the said aspect. Meet had further assured him that, he would have to only remit amounts in cash, which would be converted into dollars by him.

3.1 It is further mentioned in the FIR that, the original complainant had thereafter deposited Rs. 5 lakhs in Meet’s office namely, Tradeware Academy situated in Deepkamal Shopping Complex, Sarthana Jakatnaka, Surat as against which, a ba