Anticipatory bail may be granted when the applicant is not named in the FIR, shows willingness to cooperate with the investigation, and poses no flight risk.

ORDER :

HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.

1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.

2. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973, the applicant accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of him arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11191037241461 /2024 registered with registered with Odhav Police Station, Ahmedabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 108, 238, 54 and 85 of the BNS.

3. Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and she is falsely enroped in the offence and the allegations against the present applicant is that he is aware of the alleged offence. Though, he has destroyed the evidence and abetted the offence, except this, there is no any allegations qua direct instigation or involvement of the applicant, but, perusing the afÏdavit, Column No. 31, it appears that the allegations are against only accused Nos.1 to 3. Applicant is also not named in the FIR. It is submitted that applicant is ready and willing to join the investigation. Now nothing remains to be recovered or discovered from the present applicant and 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.

4. Learned APP has opposed the application on the ground that he has abetted the offence and destroyed the evidence and hence he is involved in the offence. Hence, as custodial interrogation of the applicant is required, he has requested to dismiss the present application.

5. 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) Offence is not punishable with life imprisonment or death penalty;

(2) applicant is having no past antecedents.

(3) The allegations against the present applicant is that he is aware of the alleged offence. Though he has destroyed the evidence and abetted the offence, except this, there is no any allegations qua direct instigation or involvement of the applicant, but, perusing the afÏdavit, Column No. 31, it appears that the allegations are against only accused Nos.1 to 3.

(4) nothing is required to be recovered and discovered from the accused;

(5) applicant is not named in the FIR;

(6) applicant is ready and willing to join the investigation;

6. 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 (2020) 5 SCC 1 , I am inclined to allow the present application.

6.1 In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex C