The court granted anticipatory bail, emphasizing the need for judicious discretion in bail applications while considering the nature of accusations and the applicant's role.

ORDER :

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 Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the applicant seeks anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11204021250002 of 2025 registered with Dakor Police Station, Dist. Kheda, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and has been falsely roped in the offence. The applicant is practicing advocate and notary and no allegation of direct involvement is there. Allegation is that, he has notarized one document which came to be executed by the co-accused and identified the co-accused. He has not played any active role or involvement in the alleged offence. The alleged document is already in possession of the co-accused. 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 accused forged the document and by using the name of dead person, executed one document and notarized the same and based on the said document, the accused have shown that, grandfather of the complainant had resigned as an administrator from Rohit community Dharmashala in the year 2015 though he was expired in 1995 and wrongly mentioned as as administrator of accused No.1. He further submitted that, though the applicant was having known about the said facts, he abetted and notarized the documents without verifying the witnesses. Therefore, as custodial interrogation of the applicant is required, he has requested to dismiss the present application.

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

(2) Allegation against the applicant is that, though the applicant was known about the fact that grandfather of the complainant was expired in 1995, he notarized the document without verifying the witnesses showing that grandfather of the complainant has resigned as an administrator from Dharamshala and the said document was produced before the office of City Survey Superintendent. Except this, no role is played by the applicant.

(3) The applicant is notary and even if, we accept the allegation at its face value, then only it may be termed as negligency on the part of the applicant and he has not put any forged signature.

5. Considering the aforesaid aspects and the law lai