Anticipatory bail granted due to lack of prior offenses and delayed FIR, emphasizing judicial discretion in bail applications.

ORDER :

HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.

RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1 – State of Gujarat.

1. 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. 11210055241727 of 2024 registered with Salabatpura Police Station, Surat, for the offences punishable under Sections 409 , 420 and 114 of Indian Penal Code , 1860.

2. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence. The applicant has no past antecedent. Transaction took place in the year 2017 and only with a view to stall the proceedings, impugned complaint is filed in the year 2024. Co-accused are granted bail either by this Court or by the Sessions Court. Nothing is required to be recovered from the applicant. Therefore, custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. Besides, the applicant is available during the course of investigation and will not flee from justice. In view of the above, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.

3. 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. He has submitted that the applicant has committed an offence of cheating and criminal breach of trust. The applicant has received goods of Rs.3,79,400/- and thereafter, did not pay the money and thereby, duped the complainant. Investigation is still going on and therefore, prima facie involvement of the applicant is revealed. Hence, application does not deserve any consideration.

4. Having heard the learned advocate 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 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. I have considered the following aspects.

(1) Allegation against the applicant is that, the applicant is partner of Varsha Sarees and has purchased the goods on credit from the complainant through accused No.1 and then did not make payment.

(2) During the period of 2017, the applicant had purchased goods worth of Rs.3,79,400/- and did not make payment. FIR came to be filed in 2024.

(3) Dispute is civil in nature and it prima facie appears that to recover the said amount, FIR came to be filed.

(4) Applicant has no past antecedent.

(5) FIR is filed belatedly.

5. 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