SANDIPBHAI BHIKHUBHAI PADSALA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present application preferred under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant seeks anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No.11191042230105 registered with Satellite Police Station, Dist. Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Ss. 406 , 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) I have heard Mr. N.D. Nanavaty, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Dharamveersinh J. Solanki, learned advocate appearing for the applicant, Mr. Manan Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - State and Mr. K.B. Anandjiwala, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Yash Dave and Vishal K. Anandjiwala, learned advocates appearing for the original complainant.

(3.) The FIR in question came to be registered by Kaushik Kumudchandra Kapadia against the present applicant alleging therein that he is a Partner of Kapadia Marketing Incorporation, Kapadia Finvest Tradco and Kapadia Investment and he is having license to lend the money. As per the FIR, the applicant is known to him and he used to borrow the amount from all the three Firms referred above of the first informant. It is further stated that right from 2012 - 13 till 2022, the present applicant has borrowed a sum of Rs.8,23,78,522.32 from Kapadia Marketing Incorporation and a sum of Rs.2,79,10,039.00 towards registered mortgage of land totalling to Rs.11,02,88,561.00. The present applicant borrowed from another firm, namely, Kapadia Finvest Tradeco a total amount of Rs.5,80,91,764.86 + interest and towards land and in all, total amount of Rs.16,83,80,326.18. As per the Mortgage Deed of the concerned land, if the present applicant fails to repay the amount borrowed by him within a period of 24 months from the date on which the mortgage deed was executed, then he was supposed to execute the Sale Deed in respect of land in question in favour of the first informant. As the applicant failed to repay the amount borrowed by him, a registered Sale Deed in respect of the land in question was to be executed and for that, towards Stamp Duty, a sum of Rs.3,04,000.00 was paid by E-challan before the Sub- Registrar by the first informant and the said document was duly signed by both the parties and appointment for execution of the Sale Deed was also taken. However, the present applicant did not remain present on that particular date and that is how the Sale Deed could not be executed and, therefore, the FIR was filed by the first informant.