Pankaj Karshanbhai Dhaduk vs State Of Gujarat

Nikhil S. Kariel, J

Heard learned advocate Mr.Urvesh Prajapati appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms.Asmita Patel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.

Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent-State.

The applicant has filed this application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the applicant on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11210060252469/2025 registered with Varachha Police Station, Surat for the offence punishable which had been obtained by the main accused through fraudulent means from the complainant. Learned advocate would submit that the present applicant is a diamond broker and it is his normal business to sell and purchase diamonds. Learned advocate would submit that as such, considering the affidavit of the investigating officer, it does not appear either that the applicant was part of the original criminal conspiracy or that the applicant knew that the diamonds had been obtained through fraudulent means and therefore, that had been sold at lesser than the market price. Having regard to such submissions, learned advocate would request that this Court may release the present applicant on regular bail.

As against the same, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms.Patel appearing for the respondent – State has vehemently opposed the grant of regular bail. Learned APP would submit that the accused had defrauded the complainant of a total of 319 diamonds valued at Rs.1,11,50,000/-. It is submitted that of the said diamonds, around 80 diamonds had been sold by the present applicant for an amount of Rs.40,00,000/- and he himself had received a commission of Rs.50,000/-. Learned APP would submit that the present applicant knew that the main accused Mahesh was not involved in the diamond business yet, the applicant had sold diamonds which were given to him by the said Mahesh. Learned APP would submit that, under such circumstances, since the investigation is still going on, more particularly, other accused having not been apprehended as of now, the present applicant may not be released.

Having regard to the fact that the applicant has prayed for grant of regular bail, learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for further reasoned order.

I have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the papers. Following aspects are considered:-

i. Prima facie, it does not appear to this Court that the present applicant was part of the original criminal conspiracy whereby the complainant had been defrauded by the main accused.

ii. The fact that the present applicant is a diamond broker, normally engaged in the business of buying/selling diamonds and whereas, the allegation of having sold certain diamonds was something done by the present applicant in normal course of business.

iii. The fact that in spite of having obtained remand of five days of the present applicant, the investigating officer is not clear as to whether the diamonds sold by the present applicant were below the market price or not.

iv. There being no antecedents of being involved in any other offence against the present applicant.

This Court has taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012] 1 SCC 40.

In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against in the First Information Report, without discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.

Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in connection with F.I.R. registered as C.R. No. 11210060252469/2025 registered with Varachha Police Station, Surat, on executing a bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;

[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;

[b] not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;

[c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week;

[d] not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions Court concerned;

[e] furnish the present address of residence to the I.O. And also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this Court;

[f] mark presence once a week till the charge-sheet is filed and once a month thereafter, for a period of six months before the concerned police station.

The Authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Court concerned will be free to take appropriate action in the matter.

Bail bond to be executed before the lower court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions in accordance with law.

At the stage of trial, the trial court shall not be influenced by any observations of this Court which are of preliminary nature made at this stage, only for the purpose of considering the application of the applicant for being released on regular bail.

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.