Gujarat HC orders FIR against Gajera brothers in Surat fraud case

Surat | Gujarat —In a strong rebuke to investigative inaction, the Gujarat High Court has directed the Police Commissioner of Surat to register an FIR against the “Gajera brothers” under multiple sections of the IPC, including criminal breach of trust, forgery, extortion and criminal conspiracy. The court ordered that the complaint be registered as per the IPC sections mentioned by the complainant. 

The order, passed on February 12, 2026, came in response to a Special Criminal Application filed by complainant Pravin Devkinandan Agarwal alias Pravin Bhut, who alleged large-scale financial fraud, embezzlement and document forgery within Shanti Residences Pvt. Ltd., where he claims his family’s 43% shareholding was illegally reduced to just over 4% using forged signatures and fabricated records.

According to the complaint, the accused — including Ashok Gajera, Rakesh Gajera and Vasant Gajera — allegedly siphoned off funds by undervaluing property transactions, routing money abroad through hawala channels and reintroducing it as foreign investment. The plea further alleges that bogus resignation documents were created to remove Agarwal as director and that threats of severe criminal implications were used to silence him.

The Gajera brothers have also been named as associates of fugitive diamantaire Mehul Choksi in proceedings linked to the multi-crore Punjab National Bank scam. Enforcement records and a charge sheet filed by the Directorate of Enforcement under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act have previously listed entities linked to the group as co-accused in connected investigations.

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) had also passed orders in relation to fund transfers involving companies connected to the network, imposing monetary penalties and market restrictions.

“The police authorities are duty-bound to register the complaint if cognizable offences are disclosed,” the High Court observed, directing compliance under the sections cited by the complainant, including 409, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the IPC.

The complainant had earlier approached the Economic Crime Prevention Branch, but alleged that no FIR was formally registered despite documented evidence. With the High Court’s intervention, the case is now set to move into the formal criminal investigation stage.