R/CR.MA/11471/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 11471 of 2025 ========================================================== KISHORSINH CHHATRASINH ZALA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance: MR AKSHAY V MATANI(11363) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR RAJ H JOBANPUTRA(10779) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR ND NANAVATI SR.ADV. WITH MR JAIVIK UDAY BHATT(7319) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR. H.K. PATEL APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA Date : 08/07/2025 ORAL ORDER 1. Rule. Learned A.P.P. waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent – State. 2. The present application has been preferred by the present applicant under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail pursuant to the offense registered before Dehgam Police Station, Gandhinagar vice C.R. No.11216005250237 of 2025 for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 117(2), 324(4) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. Heard learned advocate for the applicant. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that this is a successive anticipatory bail application and earlier anticipatory bail application has been preferred before this Court being Criminal R/CR.MA/11471/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2025 Misc. Application No.7521/2025 and it was withdrawn by present applicant on 22.05.2025. Thereafter, he again moved before the learned Sessions Court preferring application for anticipatory bail being Criminal Misc. Application No.436/2025 and the same was rejected by learned Sessions Court, Gandhinagar on 29.03.2025. Hence, the present anticipatory application has been preferred. Further, it is submitted that the present applicant preferred this application mainly on the ground that the present applicant is suffering from disease Osteochondroma type of cancer and because of that, he has preferred this anticipatory bail application. Further, it is submitted that the present applicant is innocent person, not committed any breach of offence, the applicant is a businessman living with his family, he has no criminal history and he will procure his presence at the time of trial. The learned advocate for the applicant relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court SLP (Crl.) No.5685/2023 in the case of Zaid Rana Vs. The State of Maharashtra, hence anticipatory bail is required to be granted. 4. On the other hand learned APP Mr. H.K. patel has vehementaly opposed the present anticipatory bail application and put report and submitted that on 22.05.2025, the anticipatory bail application has been withdrawn by the present applicant before this Court and thereafter, there are no change of circumstances. Further, it is submitted that even, warrant has already been issued by the Court at Dehgam under Section 70 Criminal Procedure Code, hence the present applicant is not entitled to get anticipatory bail. 5. Heard learned senior advocate Mr. N.D. Nanavati assisted R/CR.MA/11471/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2025 by learned advocate Mr. Jayvik Bhatt for the respondent No.1 original complainant. Learned senior advocate submitted that this successive anticipatory bail application and after withdrawal of the first anticipatory bail application, no change of circumstances and even warrant under Section 70 of Criminal Procedure Code has already been issued, so the present applicant cannot be granted anticipatory bail. 6. Considering the arguments of the learned advocate for the respective parties, perusing the record, the present applicant has been accused of offence registered before the Dehgam Police Station, being C.R. No.11216005250237 of 2025 for the offense punishable under Section 109, 115(2), 117(2), 324(4), 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,2023. The applicant is shown as accused No.2. As per the role attributed to the present applicant is that the present applicant in connivance with the accused No.1 dashed their car with the car of the complainant and also chase the car of the complainant. Thereafter again, dash the car with the complainants car and the complainant suffered fracture on the left hand. Considering the role attributed to the present applicant accused and considering the fact that the under Section 70 warrant under Section 70 of Bhartiya Nagarik Surksha Sanhita (BNSS) has already been issued. Further as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Srikant Upadhyay Vs. The State of Bihar reported in 2024 (3) JT 569 held that the warrant of arrest or proclamation issued then applicant is not entitled to invoke extra-ordinary power and considering the fact that on 22.05.2025, the anticipatory bail application before this Court has been withdrawn as well as looking to the police paper, there is no material collected by the investigating R/CR.MA/11471/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2025 agency thereafter there is no change of circumstances. 7. Considering this I do not find any merits in the present application. Hence, the present application is hereby rejected. Rule is discharged. (L. S. PIRZADA, J) HRT Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: HIMAL RAKESHKUMAR TRIVEDI(HCD0071), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE TWO CLASS TWO, at High Court of Gujarat on 09/07/2025 18:31:36