R/CR.MA/9097/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 9097 of 2025 ========================================================== RIJWANI SAIYED ABID HUSSAIN Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance: MR AS TIMBALIA(7372) 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 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.11210067250170 of 2025 registered with Saroli Police Station, District Surat for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409 and 120(B) 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 has been falsely enroped in the offence. He is neither administrator nor owner nor associated with Krishna Fabrics and even he is not knowing about the transaction. The allegation is civil in nature. Even perusing the allegation, it appears that cheques were issued which were dishonored and to recover the amount, complaint is filed with ulterior motive. Hence, nothing R/CR.MA/9097/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025 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 administrator of Krishna Fabrics and he approached the complainant and received goods worth Rs.17,86,503/- and had to pay the said amount within 45 days for which he issued 16 cheques which got dishonored. Therefore, custodial interrogation is required and even the applicant is having past antecedent. 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 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 R/CR.MA/9097/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025 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) Allegation is that applicant approached the complainant and received goods worth Rs.17,86,503/- for payment of which he issued 16 cheques which were dishonored however, the applicant is neither administrator nor associated with Krishna Fabrics; (3) The case is pertaining to commercial transaction which has given cloak of criminality; (4) Nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the applicant; (5) No case of custodial interrogation is made out; (6) Since inception there is no intention to cheat or commit criminal breach of trust on the part of the present applicant. As per the recent decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rikhab Birani & Anr. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. reported in 2025 INSC 512 as well as in the case of Lalit Chaturvedi and Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 171, any effort to settle civil disputes and claims, which do not involve any criminal offence, by applying pressure through criminal prosecution should be deprecated and discouraged. [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 R/CR.MA/9097/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025 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.11210067250170 of 2025 registered with Saroli Police Station, District Surat, 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 07/05/2025 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; R/CR.MA/9097/2025 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 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 06/05/2025 14:38:22