R/CR.MA/8921/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 8921 of 2025 ========================================================== NAVDURGAKUVARBA DOLATSINH JADEJA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance: DHARAMVEERSINH J SOLANKI(7481) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR HK PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 06/05/2025 ORAL ORDER [1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent- State. [1.0] By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant accused has prayed to release her on anticipatory bail in the event of her arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11188003250106/2025 registered with Bhiloda Police Station, Aravalli, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 66(d) of the IT Act. [2.0] Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and she is falsely implicated in the offence. Applicant is a lady and senior citizen and she is not named in the FIR, during the investigation, her name is surfaced. The allegations is only against the all family members and her four son are already enlarged on bail and the present applicant is similarly situated as she is wife of one Daulatsinh Jadeja. Therefore, custodial interrogation at R/CR.MA/8921/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025 this stage is not necessary. Upon instructions, learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that she is ready and willing to join the investigation. 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 looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. He has submitted that the investigation is at initial stage. The applicant in connivance with co- accused forged documents and relinquished right in their favour and produced before the authority and got mutated entries in their favour and thereby, duped legitimate right of the deceased. Both the deceased were expired prior to 2017-18 and subsequently, stamp was purchased by accused No.1 and thereafter, got entered their names in the revenue record. Considering the conduct of the applicants, prima facie offence is made out. Therefore, to unearth truth, custodial interrogation is required. Hence, application does not deserve any consideration. [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 R/CR.MA/8921/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025 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) Offence is not punishable with life imprisonment or death penalty; (2) Applicant is a senior citizen lady ; (3) The allegations is only against the all family members and her four son are already enlarged on bail and the present applicant is similarly situated as she is wife of one Daulatsinh Jadeja; (4) no antecedent is reported against the applicant; (5) nothing is required to be recovered and discovered from the accused; (6) Upon instructions, it is submitted by the learned advocate for the applicant, she is ready and willing to join the investigation; (7) Applicant is not named in the FIR; [5.0] Considering the decision rendered in case of Rameshbhai Batubhai Dabhi vs. State of Gujarat reported in (1999) 3 GLR 1150, on the ground of parity, the present application may be allowed. [5.1] 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. R/CR.MA/8921/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025 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. 11188003250106/2025 registered with Bhiloda Police Station, Aravalli, 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 herself available for interrogation whenever required; (b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 13/05/2025 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/her 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 her 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; R/CR.MA/8921/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025 (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 person who seeks and is granted pre-arrest bail; (h) It is open to the police or the investigating agency to move the learned trial Court for a direction under Section 483(2) 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) KUMAR ALOK Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: ALOK KUMAR(HC01091), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 06/05/2025 18:25:00