R/CR.MA/8681/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 8681 of 2025 ========================================================== ANITABEN JAGDISHBHAI CHAWDA & ANR. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance: MR SALIM M SAIYED(5172) for the applicants(s) No. 1,2 MR HK PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 01/05/2025 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 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the applicants accused have prayed to release them on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11216008250194 of 2025 registered with Gandhinagar Sector- 7 Police Station, District Gandhinagar for the offences punishable under Sections 108 and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”). [2.0] Learned advocate for the applicants submits that the applicants have nothing to do with the offence and applicants are senior citizens and mother in law and father in law respectively of the deceased and whatever allegation leveled are against the husband of the deceased wife i.e. accused No.1 and the only R/CR.MA/8681/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2025 allegation against the present applicants is that on instigation of present applicants, accused No.1 used to utter slang “go and die” to the deceased wife. Hence, now nothing remains to be recovered or discovered from the present applicants and therefore, custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. Besides, the applicants is available during the course of investigation and will not flee from justice. In view of the above, the applicants may be granted anticipatory bail. [3.0] Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent – State has tendered report dated 01.05.2025 of PSI, Sector-7 Police Station, Gandhinagar which is taken on record. Learned APP has opposed grant of anticipatory bail mainly on the ground that marriage span between accused No.1 and deceased was hardly three months and accused No.1 under the instigation of present applicants used to harass and slang the deceased to go and die and present applicants are specifically named in the FIR and hence, as custodial interrogation of the applicants 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 applicants including the fact as to whether he has previously undergone R/CR.MA/8681/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2025 imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence; (iii) the possibility of the applicants to flee from justice; and (iv) where the accusation has been made with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicants 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) Present applicants are senior citizens and mother in law and father in law of the deceased; (2) Plain reading of the FIR suggests that dispute was between husband and wife as the husband (Accused No.1) used to consume liquor daily due to which relationship between husband and wife was plundered; (3) Allegation against applicants is that they used to instigate accused No.1 i.e. their son to slang the deceased by saying “go and die” and except this there is no any other allegation; (4) No case for custodial interrogation is made out; (5) Nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the present applicants; (6) Decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mahendra Awase vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2025 INSC 76; Ayyub & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another reported in 2025 INSC 168 as well as R. Shashirekha vs. State of Karnataka reported in 2025 INSC 402. [5.0] Considering the aforesaid aspects and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa R/CR.MA/8681/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2025 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 applicants in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11216008250194 of 2025 registered with Gandhinagar Sector-7 Police Station, District Gandhinagar, the applicants shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with one surety of like amount on the following conditions that applicants : (a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make themselves available for interrogation whenever required; (b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 05/05/2025 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 applicants; (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; (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 R/CR.MA/8681/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2025 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 applicants; (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 applicants 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 01/05/2025 14:22:56