R/CR.MA/11822/2026 ORDER DATED: 19/05/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 11822 of 2026 ================================================================ DIPEN MOHANBHAI PARMAR Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ================================================================ Appearance: MR.DEVENDRA H PANDYA(6462) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR DHAWAN JAYSWAL, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI Date : 19/05/2026 ORAL ORDER 1. RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent - State of Gujarat. 2. Heard learned advocate for the applicant and learned APP for the respondent – State. 3. By way of the present application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), the applicant - accused has prayed for anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR bearing No.11191011260124 of 2026 registered with D.C.B. Police Station, Ahmedabad City for the offences punishable under Sections 316(5), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 54, 3(5) etc. of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. 4. 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 R/CR.MA/11822/2026 ORDER DATED: 19/05/2026 will keep himself available during the course of investigation, trial also and will not flee from justice. 5. Learned advocate for the applicant on instructions states that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions including imposition of conditions with regard to powers of Investigating Agency to file an application before the competent Court for his remand. He further submit that upon filing of such application by the Investigating Agency, the right of applicant accused to oppose such application on merits may be kept open. Learned advocate, therefore, submitted that considering the above facts, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail. 6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent – State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. 7. Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and perusing the material placed on record and taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, gravity of offences, role attributed to the accused, without discussing the evidence in detail, at this stage, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 8. This Court has considered following aspects, (i) the applicant is merely an employee in the Company offering financial services; (ii) the FIR itself indicates that the present applicant was not the partner in the Company and he was only an employee; R/CR.MA/11822/2026 ORDER DATED: 19/05/2026 (iii) as per the FIR itself, the complainant initially came in touch with the accused Nos.1 and 2 only and the present applicant was serving as a financial adviser in the Company owned by the accused Nos.1 and 2; (iv) though investigation is going on at present, prima-facie, it seems that the present applicant is only an employee and not the beneficiary of the alleged scam; (v) the applicant has assured this Court through advocate Mr. Devendra Pandya that the applicant shall make himself available for the purpose of investigation as and when required; (vi) there is no past antecedents reported against the present applicant; 9. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, since the custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required, I am inclined to consider the case of the applicant. 10. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors., reported at [2011] 1 SCC 694, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab, reported at (1980) 2 SCC 565. 11. In the result, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with FIR No.11191011260124 of 2026 registered with D.C.B. Police Station, Ahmedabad City on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety each of like amount on the following conditions: R/CR.MA/11822/2026 ORDER DATED: 19/05/2026 (a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required; (b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station on 25.05.2026 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.; (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 residence till the final disposal of the case till further orders; (f) shall not leave India without the permission of the concerned trial court and if having passport shall deposit the same before the concerned trial court within a week; and (g) it would be open to the Investigating Officer to file an application for remand if he considers it proper and just and the learned Magistrate would decide it on merits; 12. At the trial, the concerned trial court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order. 13. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. (NIRZAR S. DESAI,J) Dolly Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: DOLLYBEN CHETANBHAI VADUKAR(HC01392), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 19/05/2026 12:43:42