The Gujarat High Court has granted bail to cyber law expert Meet Raval in connection with a multi-crore stock market fraud, pointing to contradictory positions and selective arguments adopted by state prosecutors across judicial forums.
Justice Hasmukh D Suthar issued the relief after observing that the prosecution had placed conflicting accounts of Raval’s alleged role before different courts. The court also highlighted that the state had chosen not to challenge previous bail orders granted to several co-accused individuals in the same case.
Raval, who has remained in judicial custody since June 2025, was booked by the Vadnagar police in Mehsana district on charges of cheating and criminal conspiracy. Prosecutors alleged that he leveraged his specialized legal background to help his brother operate an illegitimate call centre. The venture allegedly targeted retail investors through an application dubbed Market Plus, deploying automated phone diallers to pitch market recommendations, lucrative commissions, and inflated profits.
According to investigative findings, a co-accused named Maulik transferred Rs 5,49,30,330 into accounts registered under an entity called Hub Brokerage with Bandhan Bank, Axis Bank, and Kotak Mahindra Bank. The state further claimed that an initial layer of transactions involving Rs 14.57 crore was channelled through various accounts as part of the wider operation.
Judicial Grounds for Relief
In granting bail, Justice Suthar observed that while Raval has six prior antecedents, he remains entitled to the legal presumption of innocence. The bench noted that the police have already concluded their investigation and submitted a formal chargesheet, leaving no requirement for further evidentiary recoveries from the applicant.
The court additionally took into account the procedural nature of the charges, noting that the offences are triable by a magistrate and that proceedings would take considerable time to reach a final conclusion.
Defence Cites Inconsistencies and Parity
Appearing for Raval, advocate A S Timbalia contended that his client had been falsely implicated in the case. Timbalia argued that Raval had previously obtained bail in three separate first information reports registered on similar allegations.
The defence also pressed for parity with other accused persons who had already secured liberty from the sessions court. Timbalia pointed out that co-accused Anil Thakor and Dashrath Thakor, who allegedly received Rs 1.68 crore and Rs 1.46 crore respectively, had already been granted bail. Another co-accused, Lovesh, who allegedly received Rs 7 lakh, was likewise released.
Addressing the monetary claims, the defence argued that prosecutors had misinformed the sessions court by claiming Rs 1 crore was credited to Raval. Timbalia stated that the actual figure linked to Raval was Rs 7 lakh, split across accounts held at Axis Bank and Bandhan Bank. He added that separate allegations concerning the purchase of gold using fraudulent proceeds formed part of an entirely distinct FIR.
Prosecution Opposition
Opposing the bail plea, the Additional Public Prosecutor argued that Raval played an integral role in facilitating the fraudulent scheme alongside his brother. The state submitted that Raval utilized his cyber expertise to mislead victims, route illicit funds through multiple bank accounts, and convert the money into gold using Unified Payments Interface and direct banking transfers.
The prosecution insisted that more than Rs 1 crore had moved through Raval’s personal accounts, asserting that his involvement was substantially more severe than that of the co-accused who had secured release. State counsel cautioned that Raval posed a potential risk of tampering with prosecution evidence or engaging in further offences if permitted out on bail.
