Anticipatory bail granted due to cooperation with investigation and absence of necessity for custodial interrogation, emphasizing judicial discretion based on offence severity.

ORDER :

Registry to accept vakalatnama of learned advocates Mr. J.L. Chan and Mr. Mohsin Koreja, who have instructions to appear for the original complainant.

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

2. By way of the present application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the applicant accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11191036240227 of 2024 registered with Navrangpura Police Station, Ahmedabad City for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 319(2) and 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”).

3. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and he is falsely enroped in the offence. Now nothing remains to be recovered or discovered from the present applicant and pursuant to issuance of notice, applicant has joined the investigation. Further, he is ready and willing to remain present before the I.O, if required. Therefore, custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. In view of the above, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.

4. 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.

5. Learned advocate Mr. J.L. Chan appearing for the original complainant has raised objection that Investigating Officer has not yet recovered the amount and applicant is the main accused. Therefore, he has requested to dismiss the present application.

6. 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) Alleged offence is punishable upto 7 years;

(2) It appears that the notice under Section 41A / Section 35 of the BNSS, came to be issued and the present applicant has joined the investigation. Therefore, no purpose would be served, if the bail application of the applicant is rejected;

(3) Insofar as submission of the learned advocate Mr. J.L. Chan for the original complainant that yet the amount is to be recovered by the IO is concerned, it is needless to say that, it is always open for the IO to inquire and investigate the offence and the applicant is ready and willing to join the investigation.

Without further discussing in detail, the present application deserves consideration.

7. This court has also considered the judgment in the case of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273 Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Md. Asfak Alam vs. State of Jharkhand and Another reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 892 wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that whenever there is punishment of 7 years, then the court would be liberal to exercise the discretion. Further, by exercising the discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. / under Section 482 of the BNSS, the doors o