SANJAY RAMESHCHANDRA SHAH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant, who has duped and cheated so many innocent persons, has approached this Court once again, by way of filing this application, praying to release him on bail during the pendency of the trial. Initially, this Court had released the applicant on bail. However, since it was found that he has committed breach of the conditions, the bail was cancelled, and he was taken into custody. Thereafter he has approached this Court again by filing the present application

(2.) Facts leading to the present application are as under: 2.1 A complaint has been filed against the applicant- accused, which is registered as FIR No. 232 of 2004 before the Satellite Police Station, Ahmedabad City. The said complaint has been filed by one Naranbhai and 23 others under section 420, 114, 120.B, 467, 471 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code. The complainants have booked residential flats which was to be constructed by the applicant-accused. The accused had constructed various towers, known as Nandanvan-IV Scheme. The complainants have booked their flats in 'I' Tower, and had paid considerable amount towards earnest money. Subsequently, the complainants realised that the accused had tried to defraud them, and though a promise was given to them that there is a valid title so far as the flats are concerned, it was found that the flats in question were mortgaged in favour of a nationalized Bank. The complainant ultimately filed the said complaint before the aforesaid police station, and the applicant came to be arrested in connection with the aforesaid complaint. 2.2 The applicant had initially moved this Court for granting him bail, as his bail application was rejected by the Sessions Court. The aforesaid application was registered as Criminal Misc. Application No. 8905 of 2004. At the time of hearing of the aforesaid application, learned counsel for the applicant accused submitted before this Court that the applicant accused is willing to complete the construction within reasonable time, and will hand over the vacant possession within a stipulated time. Counsel for the applicant at that time submitted that if the applicant is allowed to remain in jail for a long time, he will not be able to complete the construction within the stipulated time. The accused also agreed that so far as some of the complainants are concerned, they will be given alternative accommodation. Ultimately, this Court disposed of the aforesaid Misc. Civil Application, and released the applicant on bail by observing as under:

(3.) On the basis of the said order, the applicant had also filed an undertaking to the following effect: