ORAL ORDER

1. By way of the present petition 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 being C.R.No.11210062230063 of 2023 registered with Cyber Crime Police Station, Surat.

2. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not played any role in commission of offence. It is PLC-Ultima company who has exchanged PLC-Ultima coin to PLCU-Classic in which the petitioner has no role to play. The petitioner has conducted seminar and displayed information to the investor to invest in digital currency. He would further submit that though initially RBI has banned digital currency, but Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Internet and Mobile Association of India v/s. Reserve Bank of India [Writ Petition (Civil) No.528 of 2018] has quashed and set aside Circular of Reserve Bank of India on the issue of lacking proportionality. Thus, there is no ban on purchasing or selling digital currency.

He would further submit that other accused – Niteshkumar Sorathiya has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Criminal Misc.Application No.1158 of 2019 and other accused who have coughed with similar role have been granted regular bail by the learned Sessions Judge. These factors weighs in favour of the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate in the investigation. The petitioner is having movable and immovable property and therefore, there is no flight risk. The petitioner has not siphoned or duped any amount of investors. The petitioner has also invested in digital currency, and at the most, he can be considered as victim and not accused. On above, submissions, it is requested to allow this petition.

3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. She submitted that the petitioner is one of the main promoter of PLC-Ultima as per FIR. The petitioner has got financial gain from the alleged transaction. The petitioner was very well knowing that price of PLCU-Classic shall be down, yet the petitioner has transferred the coins from PLC-Ultima to PLCU-Classic and thereby played major role in committing offence and therefore, custodial interrogation is required. The petitioner is on run and not co- operated in investigation and thus, the petitioner may not be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

4. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties and perused the papers.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Internet and Mobile Association of India (supra), it appears that RBI circular is set at naught by Hon’ble Apex Court on the issue of proportionality. There is no other circular on the issue pointed by the learned APP which prohibits transaction of digital currency.

6. General terms and conditions of PLC Ultima are annexed Annexure A-2. Clause 8(D) reads as under :-

8(D) No guarantees / modification, restriction of services of PLC Ultima / transfer to third parties (1) Your access to the website and the services of PLC Ultima is at your risk.

(2) PLC Ultima is authorized to modify the website and services offered by PLC Ultima free of charge without prior announcement or liability.

(3) PLC Ultima reserves the right to limit the use of services including the ability of contacting other members, through the website if PLC Ultima is of the opinion that such violate contractual or legal obligations or the services are otherwise abused.

(4) PLC Ultima does not guarantee that within the scope of the competent jurisdiction under your national law it is legal for you to use the services of PLC Ultima or to advertise such or to participate in any activities of PLC Ultima; that access to the PLC Ultima website is at any time faultless and interference-free, timely, o