HITESHBHAI ISHWARBHAI PANCHAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of respondent State.

(2.) By way of the present application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant-accused has prayed for bail in connection with the FIR being C.R.No.11209020210414 of 2021 registered with Idar Police Station, District Sabarkantha for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

(3.) It is the case of the prosecution that a FIR came to be filed by Hiteshbhai Hirabhai Parmar, inter alia, contending that on 05.12.2020 in the morning, when he was reading Sandesh newspaper, he read one advertisement of loan in which it was written that one can avail loans, if he has Bajaj Finserv of IDFC capital credit car. The complainant dialed the number from his phone to inquire about it. It is further alleged that a person, picked up the phone introduced himself as Kishan Bhatt, thereafter, the complainant has requested him on phone to avail loan. It is further alleged that the accused has demanded his Aadharcard, PAN card, bank account number and Bajaj card details. Subsequently, the complainant on 17.12.2020, supplied the copies to accused Kishan Bhatt and transferred all the documents through WhatsApp portal. It is further alleged that thereafter, Kishan Bhatt begun procedure of loan by generating OTP of Bajaj Finserv Card, and after this procedure Kishan Bhatt informed the complainant that Bajaj executives will approach him on call to ask about purchases of 3 mobile phones of the OPPO brand worth Rs.49,970/-. This was being delivered to Ahmedabad at the given address. The complainant was expecting that in return of the phones, Kishan Bhatt was supposed to give him cash amount of loan, which the complainant and accused mutually agreed to it. It is also alleged that subsequently, Kishan Bhatt could not pay the loan amount to the complainant, due to some system failure. Thereafter, the complainant waited for a month till the amount was not credited to his account, thereafter, the accused has transferred Rs. 6006/- in complainants account as first EMI. Later, two EMIs' were not paid and hence, the FIR came to be lodged.