IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized the delicate balance between personal liberty and societal interest in deciding anticipatory bail applications, considering the nature and gravity of the accusation, the accused's antecedents, and the impact of granting bail on the investigation.

ORDER :

1. By way of the present petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in case of his arrest in connection with the FIR registered as C.R.No.11213030240072 of 2024 registered with Lodhika Police Station, Rajkot (Rural).

2. Facts of the case are as under :-

2.1. It is stated that the on 17th March, 2023, a case being C.R. No. 1119206023011 of 2023 was registered under Section 65(e), 116(b), 98(2), 81, and 83 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, against one Swarupsinh Manjesinh Rajput, Narpatsinh Higorsinh and Dipakbhai Harjivanbhai Dhrangadhariya alias Munnabhai (Deceased), wherein the present Applicant is the Investigating Officer. In pursuance to the aforesaid investigation, the deceased was arrested on 5th July, 2023. It is alleged by the Complainant that the Applicant demanded an amount of Rs.3 lakhs from the deceased on the pretext that if the deceased wishes not to be framed in the case, he would have to pay a sum of Rs.3 lakhs to the Applicant. It is further alleged that the said amount was paid by the deceased to the Applicant.

2.2. It is stated pursuant to the above-mentioned FIR, the deceased applied for regular bail before the Learned Session's Court Ahmedabad (Rural), which was rejected vide order dated 3rd August, 2023, passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.267 of 2023. It is stated that on 9th August 2023, charge- sheet was filed against the deceased. Thereafter, the deceased was enlarged on regular bail by the Learned Sessions Court, Ahmedabad (Rural), vide order dated 24th August, 2023, passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.330 of 2023.

2.3. It is stated that, on 10th February 2024, case being C.R. No. 11192060240070 of 2024 was registered under Section 65(a)(e), 116(b), 98(2) and 81 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, against one Jetharam Khumaram Prajapati and Sarvandas Lumbdas Sadhu. It is further stated that the investigation of the said case is pending. It is alleged by complainant that applicant had threatened the deceased and demanded sum of Rs.10 lakhs under the pretext that if the deceased wishes not to be framed in the second case, then he would have to pay amount to the applicant. The deceased committed suicide on 23.02.2024 and wife of the deceased filed FIR on the same day alleging that deceased committed suicide on account of threats and mental pressure by the applicant. Hence, impugned FIR was filed.

3. Apart from placing written submissions on record, learned Senior Advocate Mr.Tejas Barot assisted by learned advocate Mr.Anuj Trivedi for the petitioner after taking this Court through records of present applications would submit that deceased was listed bootlegger. It is submitted that one FIR was filed against him on previous occasion and considering quantity of liquor involved in the FIR, concerned Court did not release him on bail till filing of charge-sheet. It is submitted that after filing of charge-sheet, deceased filed bail application through learned advocate Mr.Alpesh Solanki and he got bail. It is submitted that another FIR came to be filed and deceased was not named in the FIR. During investigation of the offence, the petitioner who is PSI and investing the offence had apprehension that deceased was involved in the second FIR also and therefore, he was investigating the offence. It is submitted that deceased who was bootlegger could not face offence and committed suicide by making false video alleging that he has committed suicide on the ground that the petitioner is asking bribe of Rs.10 lakhs for not arraigning deceased in offence. It is submitted that no FIR under Prevention of Corruption Act is filed.

3.1. It is submitted by learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner that though nothing has been mentioned in the FIR which link present petitioner with suicide committed by deceased, in the affidavit filed by Investigating Officer before the learned Trial Court, it is stated tha