R/CR.MA/9212/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/05/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 9212 of 2025 ========================================================== SUJIT KHOBHARI PANDEY Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance: MR DAXAY D PATEL(6633) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 08/05/2025 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 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.11210025250496 of 2025 registered with Limbayat Police Station, Surat City for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. [2.0] Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and the applicant is falsely enroped in the offence. The allegation is that the complainant had sent gray cloth worth Rs.67,18,865/- through 43 different bills during the period from 18.03.2024 to 15.06.2024 to the present applicant i.e. proprietor of Shubham Fashion however, subsequent to filing of the FIR, the applicant has executed a Memorandum of Understanding R/CR.MA/9212/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/05/2025 dated 12.08.2024 in favor of the complainant pursuant to which the applicant has issued cheques to pay the amount and hence, there is no any allegation against the applicant insofar as offence of cheating or criminal breach of trust is concerned. Applicant is not having any past antecedent 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 tenders report of the concerned Investigating Officer which is taken on record. He has opposed grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that by winning over the trust and faith of the complainant, applicant has received gray goods worth Rs.67.18 lakh from the complainant and thereafter did not make payment for the same and thus, there was dishonest intention right from the inception and if the applicant is granted bail then the possibility of tampering with the evidence cannot be ruled out. 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) R/CR.MA/9212/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/05/2025 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) Offence is not punishable with life imprisonment or death penalty and triable by the Court of JMFC; (2) Prima facie, it appears that the allegation is in nature of commercial transaction whereby it is alleged that applicant received gray cloth worth Rs.10,00,000/- from the complainant though Rs.7,00,000/- is already paid and Rs.3,21,000/- is yet to be paid and hence, there is no any allegation against the applicant insofar as offence of cheating or criminal breach of trust is concerned. (3) Similarly situated co-accused considered by this Court; (4) No case for 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 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. R/CR.MA/9212/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/05/2025 [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.11210025250496 of 2025 registered with Limbayat Police Station, Surat City, 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 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 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; (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 R/CR.MA/9212/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/05/2025 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 08/05/2025 14:44:55