R/CR.MA/9436/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/05/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 9436 of 2025 ========================================================== MAGANBHAI MAFABHAI CHARAMTA & ORS. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance: MR PRAVIN GONDALIYA(1974) for the applicants(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 MR HARDIK MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 07/05/2025 ORAL ORDER RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent – State of Gujarat. [1.0] At the outset, learned advocate for the applicants does not press the present application qua applicants Nos.1, 3, 5, 7, 8 and 9. Hence, present application stands disposed of as not pressed qua applicants Nos.1, 3, 5, 7, 8 and 9 and is being considered only qua applicant Nos.2, 4 and 6. [2.0] By way of the present application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the applicant Nos.2, 4 and 6 – KANABHAI KALUBHAI CHARAMTA, RAMSHIBHAI PIRABHAI CHARAMTA and DEVJIBHAI RAMABHAI CHARAMTA have prayed to release them on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11195019250306 of 2025 registered with Deesa Rural Police Station, District Banaskantha for the offences punishable under Sections 140(3), 189(2), 118(1), 117(2), 115(2), 191(2), 191(3) and 190 R/CR.MA/9436/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/05/2025 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. [2.0] Learned advocate for the applicants submits that the applicant Nos.2, 4 and 6 have nothing to do with the offence and they are falsely enroped in the offence however, no specific role or allegation is made against the applicant Nos.2, 4 and 6 and no overt act has been attributed to them. The alleged incident took place in connection with marriage of the complainant with daughter of accused No.4 against the will and wish of family members wherein by hatching criminal conspiracy and forming unlawful assembly, they have made assault and abducted the wife of the complainant i.e. daughter of accused No.4 however, the applicant Nos.2, 4 and 6 have not caused any injury to anyone and merely they were members of the unlawful assembly. Further, the applicant Nos.2, 4 and 6 are not having any past antecedents and nothing remains to be recovered or discovered from the applicants and therefore, custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. Besides, the applicants are 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 opposed grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that the applicants are named in the FIR and they were members of unlawful assembly and they assaulted the injured with common object and abducted and thereafter kidnapped the daughter of accused No.4 and caused injury. Hence, as custodial interrogation of applicant Nos.2, 4 and 6 is required, he has requested to dismiss the present application. [4.0] Having heard the learned advocate for the parties and perusing R/CR.MA/9436/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/05/2025 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 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) Offence is not punishable with life imprisonment or death penalty; (2) The alleged incident took place on 01.04.2025 at midnight 12 O’ Clock wherein it is alleged that accused persons went to the house of the complainant and dragged the wife of complainant and kidnapped her. Role attributed to the present applicants is that they were members of unlawful assembly and except this no any overt act is attributed to the present applicant Nos.2, 4 and 6 and they have not caused any injury; (3) Other similarly situated co-accused are arrested and released on regular bail; (4) Applicant Nos.2, 4 and 6 are not having any past antecedents; (5) No case for custodial interrogation is made out; (6) Nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the R/CR.MA/9436/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/05/2025 present applicants. [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. [6.0] In the result, the present application is allowed by directing that in the event of arrest / appearance of applicant Nos.2, 4 and 6 – KANABHAI KALUBHAI CHARAMTA, RAMSHIBHAI PIRABHAI CHARAMTA and DEVJIBHAI RAMABHAI CHARAMTA in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11195019250306 of 2025 registered with Deesa Rural Police Station, District Banaskantha, they 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 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 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 officer; (d) shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and R/CR.MA/9436/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/05/2025 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 their 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 qua applicant Nos.2, 4 and 6 – KANABHAI KALUBHAI CHARAMTA, RAMSHIBHAI PIRABHAI CHARAMTA and DEVJIBHAI RAMABHAI CHARAMTA only. 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 07/05/2025 16:22:52