JAGDISHBHAI CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since, both the matters arise out of the same FIR, they are heard together and being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) Learned Advocate, Mr. Shah, appearing for the petitioner, namely Jagdihbhai Jethabhai Chauhan, submitted that he is not named in the FIR and as such, he is innocent. It was submitted that the name of Jagdishbhai was proposed as a trustee of the Trust, however, since, the Charity Commissioner did not accept the Change Report, he could not become the trustee. It was submitted that the role of Jagdishbhai was to collect cash amount from various departments of the hospital run by the Trust and to deposit the same in the bank account of the Trust, however, in the FIR it is alleged that instead so doing, Jagdishbhai gave such amounts to accused No.1, namely Bharatsinh Talakinh Gohil, and thereby, a huge amount is alleged to have been siphoned by Jagdishbhai and other accused persons. It was submitted that, however, there is no material on record to indicate that Jagdishbhai siphoned or misappropriated any amount of the Trust. It was submitted that one of the co-accused, namely Jigar Sandipkumar Jain, has been granted pre-arrest bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dtd. 2/9/2023, passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 12185 of 2023, whereas, another co-accused, namely Pravin Ramabhai Patel, has been granted regular bail by the Coordinate Bench vide order dtd. 23/8/2023, passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 11724 of 2023. It was, further, submitted that on the basis of the calculation made by the concerned C.A., which is of notional in nature, it is being alleged that the huge amount has been siphoned or misappropriated.

(3.) On the other hand, learned Advocate, Ms. Gemini Patel, appearing for the First Informant strongly opposed these petitions and submitted that the present petitioners are the masterminds behind the crime. It was submitted that, taking advantage of the situation prevailing at the time of Covid-19 pandemic, the present petitioners and the co-accused admitted and treated the patients in the hospital run by the Trust, without registering the same, and obtained huge amounts from such patients and then, misappropriated the same. It was submitted that it is a well-designed crime by all the accused persons, including the present petitioners, to siphon the money belonging to the Trust. It was, further, submitted that, during Covid-19 pandemic, all the hospitals were running beyound their capacities and hence, it cannot be believed that the hospital run by the Trust received less amount, than it usually use to receive. So far as the ground of parity is concerned, it was submitted that the main accused is given anticipatory bail, only on the ground of his poor health, and therefore, the petitioners cannot claim parity with him. So far as the other accused persons, who have been granted regular bail, is concerned, it was submitted that they were granted regular bail, pursuant to the filing of the charge-sheet and therefore, their case shall not apply in the case of the present petitioners, who are seeking anticipatory bail. Thereby, it was submitted that considering the serious nature of offence, these petitions be dismissed.