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 registered as C.R.No.11190002231229 of 2023 registered with Botad Police Station, Botad.

2. Facts of the case are as under :-

2.1. It is the case of the complainant that, in the year 2018-19, daughter of the complainant was studying in LLM at I.M.Nanavati Law Collage, Ahmedabad, at that time she came into contact with Naynaben Pandya, who was also studying in LLM. It is stated in the complaint that as Naynaben is also belongs to Botad, they became friends and several occasion they were talking on mobile phone. It is the case of the complainant that, Naynaben also introduce her husband with Nency and Naynaben told to Nency that, her husband is serving in Secretariat. It is the case of the complainant that, son of the complainant was studying in 12th science and due to covid, exam was canceled and he was passed by mass promotion, and hence his merit was low, and he wanted to take admission in MBBS. At that time complainant's daughter made a phone call to the wife of petitioner and informed regarding the admission of her Brother in MBBS, and also seek the help of present petitioner. Thereafter Naynaben asked to Nency that admission in MBBS in Management quota, will be done and for that they have to pay sixty lakhs, and for that amount complainant show his willingness. Thereafter as stated in the complaint, they visited Ahmedabad and then present petitioner took they in Sachivalay, were they met one person and they were also took them in one of the chamber. It is stated in the complaint that, thereafter in different occasion complainant gave amount to present petitioner for admission of his son in MBBS. It is stated in the complaint that, present petitioner also informed that, he has also having good relation with the officer of competition exam like civil services, and for that complainant shows his willingness for her daughter Nency to clear UPSC exam, ultimately of the clearance of UPSC exam of Nency, an amount of 45 lakhs were fixed, and for that complainant sold the plot situated in Botad, were also execute the sale deed in the name of the wife of complainant. It is stated in the complaint that, complainant gave amount as demanded by the petitioner, but neither admission of the son was done nor his daughter UPSC exam was cleared, thereafter complainant made a phone call to present petitioner on several occasion, but he could not get satisfactory reply and then present petitioner stop to receive the phone call of complainant. It is stated in the complaint that in all fraud and cheating of Rs.1,12,50,000/- was committed by present petitioner. Hence, FIR is filed.

3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent, he has not committed any offence. It is submitted that allegations made in the FIR are not believable. There is no evidence on record which indicates that the petitioner has committed any offence. It is submitted that there is delay of one year in filing FIR and no explanation is given regarding delay. Thus prima facie it raises doubt on the version stated in the FIR. It is submitted that during the hearing of bail application, wife of the petitioner along with complainant entered into compromise and therefore, considering this aspect bail may be granted. It is submitted that there was oral understanding between the parties that sale deed would be reversed back in favour of the complainant and Rs.40 lakhs to be given to the complainant. This compromise was arrived between the parties. It is submitted that to show bona-fide the petitioner has reversed sale deed and also paid some amount to the complainant. It is submitted that two four wheel car worth Rs.30,00,000/- are lying with the complainant. It is submitted that the petitioner has adhered to compromise arrived between the part