R/CR.MA/16050/2026 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 16050 of 2026 ========================================================== YOGESH HARILAL THAKKAR Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance: MR ZUBIN BHARDA, ADVOCATE WITH MR. DHRUVIN P BHUPTANI(8295) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR SMIT H THAKKAR(12758) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR KRUTIK PARIKH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================= CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 16/07/2026 ORDER [1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State. [2.0] The present application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11192011260139 of 2026 registered with Bopal Police Station, Ahmedabad Rural, for the offences under Sections 316(2), 316(5), 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS. [3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence. Investigation is over and chargesheet has been filed. Nothing is required to be recovered or discovered. The applicant has nothing to do with the alleged offence and has not received any amount towards the said transaction. It is submitted that the applicant acted only as a broker in relation to the construction scheme and used to receive 3 % brokerage commission for introducing purchasers. Except for receiving such brokerage, no other role has been attributed to the applicant. He is R/CR.MA/16050/2026 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2026 neither a signatory to any MOU, agreement, nor any other document relating to the scheme. He has not floated, promoted, or managed the scheme in any manner. It is further submitted that, except for an amount of Rs. 3,50,000/-, which was transferred to the applicant's bank account through Google Pay by one customer, no other amount has been credited to his account. No money trail has been found linking the applicant to the funds allegedly collected from the investors, except for the aforesaid transaction. However, the applicant is ready and willing to deposit the said amount of Rs.3,50,000/- and for that wife of the applicant has filed an undertaking before this Court. He therefore submits that, considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions. [4.0] Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed the present application and requested to dismiss the present application for regular bail on the ground that the applicant, in connivance with the co-accused, hatched a criminal conspiracy and floated a scheme with the intention of inducing innocent persons to invest their money in the said scheme. It is further alleged that, instead of completing the project, the accused discontinued the scheme and lured the investors by assuring them if they did not want to continue with the booking of flats, they would receive a refund of the principal amount along with good returns. The scheme consists total 117 residential units, and that the accused persons collected a total amount of Rs. 18,07,59,003/- from innocent investors. In all, it is alleged that the accused, including the present applicant, lured 46 persons to invest in the said scheme. Further, the applicant is having past antecedent and if he is released on bail, possibility cannot be ruled out that the applicant will flee from justice. Therefore, present application does not deserve consideration. R/CR.MA/16050/2026 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2026 [5.0] While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the accused in the alleged offence, the jurisdiction to grant bail has to be exercised on the basis of the well settled principles having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case and the following factors are to be taken into consideration while considering an application for bail: (i) the nature of accusation and the severity of the punishment and the nature of the materials relied upon by the prosecution; (ii) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses and threat to the complainant or the witnesses; (iii) reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the time of trial or the likelihood of his abscondence; (iv) character behaviour and standing of the accused and the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused; (v) larger interest of the public or the State and similar other considerations are required to be considered. [6.0] I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the investigation papers. Following aspects have been considered: (1) Investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed; (2) Applicant is behind the bar since 17.12.2025; (3) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant; (4) Offence is triable by JMFC Court; (5) Though the applicant is having one past antecedent, he is presumed to be innocent till proven guilty;. (6) Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will take its own time. (7) As per the case of the prosecution, the accused persons allegedly formed a group under the name "Keshav Narayan" and floated a scheme known as "Akshar Anant" on Survey R/CR.MA/16050/2026 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2026 No. 468, Draft Town Planning Scheme No. 3, Final Plot No. 144. The said project consisted of 4 residential blocks, each comprising 14 floors, along with commercial shops. It is alleged that the complainant paid a sum of Rs.27,09,000/- towards the booking of Flat No. D-803 in the said scheme, and the said amount was transferred to the account of Keshav Narayan FinCorp. Since the project was neither registered under RERA nor any construction had commenced, MOU came to be executed, wherein it was agreed that if the complainant did not wish to continue with the scheme and purchase the flat, the accused would refund the principal amount along with interest, aggregating to Rs.40,63,500/-. It is further alleged that the accused persons collected a total amount of Rs. 12,40,59,000/- from 46 customers and thereafter discontinued the scheme and transferred the property to the co-accused. In these circumstances, the present FIR came to be registered. (8) So far as the role of the present applicant is concerned, the prosecution alleges that the applicant acted as a broker by explaining the scheme to purchasers and made people investment therein. For such act, the applicant received a commission of 3%. It is further alleged that one witness, Naresh Kashinath Maturkar, booked one flat through the applicant and transferred an amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- to the applicant's bank account. However, to show his bona fide, the applicant is ready and willing to refund the said amount. Undertaking filed by the wife of the applicant is ordered to be taken on record. Page 4 of 7 R/CR.MA/16050/2026 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2026 (9) Except for the aforesaid allegation, no other role has been attributed to the applicant. The applicant had no direct involvement in floating the scheme, was not involved in the execution of any MOU with any of the victims, and is not a signatory to any agreement or document pertaining to the scheme. Considering the limited role attributed to the applicant, present application deserves consideration. [7.0] This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012]1 SCC 40 as well as in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1978)1 SCC 240. Obviously, the conclusion of trial will take time and keeping the accused behind the bars is nothing but amounts to pre-trial conviction and therefore, considering the celebrated principle of bail jurisprudence is that “bail is a rule and jail is exception” as well as the concept of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, present application deserves consideration. [8.0] In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the FIR, 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 regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11192011260139 of 2026 registered with Bopal Police Station, Ahmedabad Rural on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he/she shall; R/CR.MA/16050/2026 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2026 (a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty; (b) not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution & shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and shall not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police; (c) surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a week; (d) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Trial Court concerned; (e) mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in every month for a period of six months between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.; (f) furnish the Aadhaar card, email ID/present address of his residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence/contact number without prior permission of Trial Court; (g) not to indulge in any illegal activity failing which learned trial Court shall issue warrant and cancel the bail of the applicant. (h) The applicant shall deposit Rs.3,50,000/- before the learned Sessions Court concerned within two weeks from the date of his actual release from the jail and shall also file an undertaking to that effect at the time of release from jail. [9.0] 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 Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. [10.0] 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. Page 6 of 7 R/CR.MA/16050/2026 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2026 [11.0] At the trial, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature qua the evidence at this stage made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail. [12.0] Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) SUCHIT Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: PATEL SUCHIT JAYESHBHAI(HC01083), Private Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 17/07/2026 10:49:04