IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 26292 of 2025 ==========================================================

MANOJ TILAKDHARI PANDEY Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR O I PATHAN(7684) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR KRUTIK PARIKH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE UTKARSH THAKORBHAI DESAI Date : 16/12/2025

ORAL ORDER

1. The applicant, who is apprehending arrest at the hands of CID Crime Police, Ahmedabad, has preferred the present application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (for short ‘BNSS, 2023’) praying for anticipatory bail. The offence alleged to have been committed under Sections 406, 420, 114 and 120B of the IPC and Section 3 of the Gujarat Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 2003 came to be registered vide C.R. No. 11 of 2021.

2. Heard learned advocate Mr. O.I. Pathan for the applicant, who has reiterated the averments of the application. Mr. Pathan has submitted that, though the period of occurrence of offence is shown to have been from 01.01.2011 to 14.10.2021, the FIR came to be registered only on 14.10.2021, and no grounds for delay having been caused in lodging the FIR have been mentioned in Column No. 8 of the FIR. According to Mr. Pathan, though the applicant was shown as Director of Ram Agri Infra (India) Pvt. Ltd. from the years 2011 to 2013, he had left the company in the year 2013 itself. The applicant is not involved in the offence in any manner. The allegations in the FIR pertain to civil dispute. Co-accused have been released on anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate bench of the High Court as well as by the learned trial court. Hence, the present application should be allowed.

3. Mr. Krutik Parikh, learned APP has drawn the attention of the court towards the statements of various victims, wherein, they have stated that, though they had remitted the sale price of the plots to the company Ram Agri Infra (India) Pvt. Ltd., they have not been given the plots, and accordingly, they have been cheated by the company. Hence, this application should not be allowed.

4. At the outset, the FIR came to be lodged by one Haribhai Kalabhai Vankar on 14.10.2021 stating that, Ram Agri Infra (India) Pvt. Ltd. had launched a scheme named ‘Dream City’, whereby, they were selling residential plots. The original complainant and his two friends had selected plots for themselves and had paid the total amounts of the plots to the company. However, inspite of waiting for two years, the scheme was never completed and the plots were never allotted to them. It is also mentioned that, the sale amounts of the plots were also not repaid to them by the authorized persons of the company.

5. It is true that co-accused have been released by the co-ordinate bench of the High Court, as well as the learned trial court. However, the applicant was never found, and after he could be traced, he had sent a request letter to the police CID Crime Police Station on 24.10.2024 stating that, he needed some time to attend the police station as he was sick, and was advised by his doctor to not travel. It also transpires that, the applicant’s sister was informed as regards securing presence of the applicant and she had assured the Investigation Officer that, she would present her brother in two days before the Ahmedabad CID Crime Police Station. However, the applicant had never remained present before the Investigation Officer at Ahmedabad. Thus, the argument of learned advocate Mr. Pathan that, the applicant was not knowing anything about the present FIR, and that he did not know that he had to remain present before the Investigation Officer, is falsified from these facts. It also appears that, the Investigation Officer had issued a summons under Section 179 of the BNSS, 2023 which was rece