R/CR.MA/11198/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 11198 of 2025 ========================================================== SUBHA SANJAY TIWARI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance: MR DHRUV H CHAUDHARY(12328) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR. NIRAJ SHARMA APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI Date : 11/07/2025 ORAL ORDER 1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for respondent – State of Gujarat. 2. By way of the present application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the applicant has prayed for anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11219030250019 of 2025 registered with Saputara Police Station, Dang for the alleged offences as mentioned in the FIR. 3. Registry is directed to carry out necessary correction in the cause title. The correct name of the applicant is SHUBHA as per the name mentioned in the petition. 4. Learned senior advocate Mr. I. H. Syed assisted by Mr. Dhruv H. Chaudhadri and Mr. Anurag Rathor for the applicant submits that one unfortunate incident of accident R/CR.MA/11198/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025 has occurred on 02.02.2025, and on the same day FIR was registered wherein the driver of the vehicle and the tour organizer passed away. During the course of the investigation, it has come on record that fitness certificate of the vehicle was there, and the number plate of the vehicle is changed and engine number as well as chassis number have been removed by imposing another numbers, and therefore, the owner of the vehicle has been arraigned as accused. Learned senior advocate Mr. Syed submits that, in fact, the said vehicle was registered in the name of the present applicant. The applicant is a lady, residing in Uttar Pradesh, and in fact, transport business is run and function by her husband, but the vehicles were purchased in the name of the present applicant, and for the purpose of running and functioning the transport business, the present applicant has already handed over the power of attorney to her husband. In fact, total 7 vehicles have been registered in the name of the present applicant, but the present applicant is not directly or indirectly associated or connected with the commission of crime. He further submits that the present applicant is having no past antecedents. Rest of the accused persons have already been released on regular bail. Considering the above stated factual aspects, bail application of the applicant may be entertained by imposing suitable terms and conditions. 5. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the nature of allegations are such for which custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. He further submits that the applicant will keep herself available during the course of investigation, trial also and will not flee from justice. Page 2 of 6 R/CR.MA/11198/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025 6. Learned advocate for the applicant on instructions states that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed while releasing the applicant on anticipatory bail. Learned advocate, therefore, submitted that considering the above facts, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail. 7. Learned APP Mr. Sharma has objected the present application with vehemence and submits that name and specific role of the applicant have clearly come out on surface on the basis of evidence/material collected by the investigating officer. The applicant is owner of the said vehicle. It is found out during the course of the investigation that number plate affixed upon the vehicle is false one and engine number and chassis number have also been corrected, therefore, it can safely be said that being the owner of the vehicle, those facts might be in the knowledge of the present applicant, and therefore, the Hon’ble court may not exercise its discretionary power in favour of the applicant. 8. Having heard the learned advocates appearing 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 R/CR.MA/11198/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025 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. 9. I have considered the following aspects. (a) Except the present applicant, rest of the accused persons have arrested and subsequently released on regular bail. So far as the role of the present applicant is concerned, she is not actively involved in the business. (b) All the vehicles were registered in the name of the present applicant, but entire business is run and functioned by her husband. She has already issued a power of attorney in favour of her husband before registration of the FIR. The applicant is a lady accused aged 51 years, and not available at the place of occurrence at the time of incident. (c) The fitness period of the vehicle has already been expired, despite the said fact the vehicle was plied upon the road, but mode of the operations of the entire business is done by her husband, and she is not actively participating in the day to day affairs of the business. 10. 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 R/CR.MA/11198/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025 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. 11. In the result, the present application is allowed by directing that in the event of arrest / appearance of the applicant in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11219030250019 of 2025 registered with Saputara Police Station, Dang, 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 30.07.2025 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 R/CR.MA/11198/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025 concerned and shall not change her/his residence till the final disposal of the case till further orders; (f) shall not leave the State of Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh 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 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. 12. 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. 13. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. (DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J) AMIT ITALIAN Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE I, at High Court of Gujarat on 17/07/2025 14:24:10