R/CR.MA/8736/2025 ORDER DATED: 02/05/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 8736 of 2025 ========================================================== JENUSINH ANUPSINH VAGHELA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance: MR RB THAKOR(6743) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR HARDIK MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 02/05/2025 ORAL ORDER RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent – State of Gujarat. [1.0] By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “CrPC”), 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.11195061250104 of 2025 registered with Dantiwada Police Station, District Banaskantha for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 281, 115(2), 324(2), 296(b), 351(3) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) and sections 177, 184 and 134 of the Motor Vehicles Act. [2.0] Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and the applicant falsely enroped in the offence. The offence in present case is committed in two parts wherein keeping grudge of first part of R/CR.MA/8736/2025 ORDER DATED: 02/05/2025 offence, accused No.1 tried to dash his swift car with the motorcycle of the complainant however, the applicant was not present during the second part of the offence. Hence, now nothing remains to be recovered or discovered from the present applicant and therefore, custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. Besides, the applicant is available during the course of investigation and will not flee from justice. 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 applicant is involved in the offence and is having past six antecedents and is named specifically in the FIR and hence, as custodial interrogation of the applicant is required, 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 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 R/CR.MA/8736/2025 ORDER DATED: 02/05/2025 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) Offence is not punishable with life imprisonment or death penalty; (2) Prima facie, it appears that the alleged incident took place in two parts. In first part some altercation took place in connection of riding motorcycle and at that time accused Nos.1 and 2 got excited and made an assault with kick and fist blows and thereafter in second part, accused No.1 tried to dash his swift car with the motorcycle of the complainant and caused injuries however, he is out of danger and no role is attributed to the present applicant; (3) Though applicant is having past antecedents but is governed by presumption of innocence; (4) Nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the present applicant; (5) No case of custodial interrogation is made out. [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 R/CR.MA/8736/2025 ORDER DATED: 02/05/2025 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.11195061250104 of 2025 registered with Dantiwada Police Station, District Banaskantha, 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 06/05/2025 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 officer; (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 officer and the court concerned and shall not change his residence till the final disposal of the case till further orders; R/CR.MA/8736/2025 ORDER DATED: 02/05/2025 (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.) Ajay Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: AJAY CHANDRAN MENON(HC00939), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 02/05/2025 15:41:04