Vadodara: Nayanaben Mahida, a resident of Deepsharshan Society in Atladra, Vadodara, is currently in judicial custody under the supervision of the Crime Branch. The 11th Additional Sessions Judge, Badri Kamalkumar Dansodi, rejected her regular bail petition after a detailed judicial review, taking a firm stance on the matter.
Investigations revealed that in 2021, through Sahyog Financial Services operating at Signet Hub, Aksharchok, Nayanaben Mahida and her son Akash Mahida claimed to provide a loan of ₹300 crore to Radhika Intermediate Company, Valsad, for a solar project and green hydrogen plant. In return, they demanded a commission of ₹30 lakh.
FCRF Launches Premier CISO Certification Amid Rising Demand for Cybersecurity Leadership
After receiving a total of ₹25 lakh from the complainant across multiple accounts, the accused returned only ₹2.5 lakh, retaining the remaining ₹22.5 lakh, thereby clearly committing loan fraud.
Government counsel Anil Desai argued that the accused had other similar offences registered against her, and her co-accused Maksud Ahmed Kazi is still absconding. Granting bail under these circumstances could increase the risk of future criminal activity.
The court also noted that the accused’s name was included in the FIR from the very beginning, and she appears to be the primary conspirator. Other accused individuals have not been apprehended so far.
Citing Supreme Court judgments, the court stated that the mere filing of a charge sheet does not create new grounds for bail. With three other similar complaints against the accused, the court rejected the bail request, emphasizing the risk of future offences.
Ultimately, the court concluded that considering the allegations and past behavior of the accused, granting bail would pose a high likelihood of recurrence of such crimes. Hence, her regular bail petition was denied.
Experts note that this decision reflects the judiciary’s strict approach toward banking and corporate fraud cases. In such cases, bail is only granted when there is minimal risk of further crime and strong evidence against the accused.
The verdict also sends a clear message that accused involved in corruption and fraud must be kept in custody in time to prevent future crimes, highlighting the judiciary’s priority in safeguarding financial integrity.
The public is advised to report any suspicious financial transactions or fraud immediately to the police or relevant investigative agency. Prompt reporting can help prevent future incidents and assist authorities in tackling other potential financial fraud cases.
This case underscores the importance of a strict stance by authorities and judiciary in banking and corporate fraud matters to maintain consumer protection and trust in the financial system.
