R/CR.MA/8100/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 8100 of 2025 ========================================================== RAJESHBHAI HARKISHENBHAI DEVMURARI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance: MR PRADEEP PATEL(642) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR PRANAV DHAGAT APPfor the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 24/04/2025 ORAL ORDER RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1 – State of Gujarat. [1.0] By way of the present application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the applicant accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.2 of 2025 (11194070250002) registered with Surendranagar ACB Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 13(1)E, 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and under Section 13(1)(B) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended in the year 2018). [2.0] Learned advocate for the applicant submits that present applicant has retired in the year 2022 and the alleged cheque period in the complaint is between 01/04/2012 to 31/08/2019 when the applicant was working as Senior Clerk (Dy. Accountant R/CR.MA/8100/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2025 Incharge) in the ofÏce of the Executive Engineer, Saurashtra Branch Canal Division No.2/1, Dharagadhra and he has accumulated disproportionate assets. In this regard, the alleged complaint is registered. Prior to lodgement of the complaint, he was called for and has given explanation and joined the investigation and provided the details. His detailed statement has been recorded and his son is having independent income and his father was also retired employee and his brother was in the government service. Hence, there is no any iota of evidence / material qua misconduct or any accumulation of disproportionate assets. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that applicant is ready and willing to join the investigation and there is no antecedents. In view of the above, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail. [3.0] Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent – State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that present applicant is indulged in criminal misconduct and during his service as a Public servant, he has accumulated 65.33% excess assets which is disproportionate to his known income of source. Hence, prima facie, the offence is made out as he has not joined the investigation and custodial interrogation of the applicant is required and therefore considering the nature of allegations, he has requested to dismiss the present application. [4.0] Having heard the learned advocate for the parties and perusing the investigation papers, it is equally incumbent upon R/CR.MA/8100/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2025 the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously, cautiously and strictly in compliance with the basic principles laid down in a plethora of decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court on the point. It is well settled that, among other circumstances, the factors to be borne in mind while considering an application for bail are (i) the nature and gravity of the accusation; (ii) the antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether he has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence; (iii) the possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; and (iv) where the accusation has been made with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by having him so arrested. Though at the stage of granting bail an elaborate examination of evidence and detailed reasons touching the merit of the case, which may prejudice the accused, should be avoided. I have considered the following aspects. (1) The applicant has retired in the year 2022 and cheque period is from 2012 to 2019. The case is based upon the documentary evidence. Prior to lodgement of the complaint, notice was given to the applicant and he had appeared before the authority and disclosed his income and known source of his income as Rs.58,17,198/-; (2) Even the applicant is ready and willing to join and co- operate with the investigation; no any past antecedent is recorded; (3) Considered the quantum of punishment; R/CR.MA/8100/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2025 [5.0] Considering the aforesaid aspects and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. reported in (2011) 1 SCC 6941, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. reported in (1980) 2 SCC 665 and also the decision in the case of Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, I am inclined to allow the present application. [6.0] In the result, the present application is allowed by directing that in the event of arrest / appearance of the applicant in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.2 of 2025 (11194070250002) registered with Surendranagar ACB Police Station, the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions that applicant : (a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required; (b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 01/05/2025 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. and the IO shall ensure that no unnecessary harassment or inconvenience is caused to the applicant; (c) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police ofÏcer; R/CR.MA/8100/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2025 (d) shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police; (e) shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the investigating ofÏcer and the court concerned and shall not change his residence till the final disposal of the case till further orders; (f) shall not leave India without the permission of the Court and if having passport shall deposit the same before the Trial Court within a week; (g) an order of anticipatory bail does not in any manner limit or restrict the rights or duties of the police or investigative agency, to investigate into the charges against the applicant; (h) It is open to the police or the investigating agency to move the learned trial Court for a direction under Section 483(2) of the BNSS to arrest the accused, in the event of violation of any term, such as absconding, non-cooperating during investigation, evasion, intimidation or inducement to witnesses with a view to influence outcome of the investigation or trial, etc.- [7.0] At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail. [8.0] Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Application is disposed of accordingly. Direct service is permitted. (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) sompura Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA SOMPURA(HC00189), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 24/04/2025 14:24:54