Back
2025 Supreme(GUJ) 499
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J
LAXMANBHAI DEVSHIBHAI BHADKA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 4521 of 2025
Anticipatory bail granted due to the applicant's age and lack of overt acts, emphasizing the need for judicious discretion in bail applications.
Headnote:
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 482 - Anticipatory bail - Application for anticipatory bail granted due to lack of overt acts attributed to the applicant and age-related ailments - The applicant is 75 years old, with no requirement for custodial interrogation as no evidence needs to be recovered from him. (Paras 2.0, 4.0, 5.0)
(B) Bail Application - Considerations for granting bail include the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant, and possibility of fleeing from justice. The court noted that the applicant's age and health conditions weigh in favor of granting bail. (Paras 4.0, 5.0)
Facts of the case:
The applicant, a 75-year-old senior citizen, faced accusations related to a quarrel involving unlawful assembly and damage to property, but he claimed no injury was caused by him, and co-accused had already been arrested. (Paras 2.0, 4.0)
Findings of Court:
The court found no necessity for custodial interrogation and acknowledged the applicant's health and age, allowing bail under specified conditions. (Paras 5.0, 6.0)
Issues: The main issues included whether the applicant poses a flight risk and the necessity of custodial interrogation given his age and health. (Paras 4.0, 5.0)
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the discretion to grant bail should be exercised judiciously, considering the applicant's age, lack of overt acts, and the absence of need for custodial interrogation. (Paras 4.0, 5.0)
Result: Application allowed, and the applicant is granted anticipatory bail on certain conditions. (Paras 6.0, 8.0)
ORDER :
RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent – 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 accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11211056250109 of 2025 registered with Surendranagar City ‘B’ Division Police Station, District Surendranagar for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 324(4), 189(1), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 352, 351(2) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”).
2. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and has been falsely enroped in the offence. Applicant is senior citizen aged 75 years and suffering from various age related ailments. The allegation is that quarrel took place between accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 at the hotel owned by the complainant and thereafter while the settlement talks were going on, accused Nos.3 to 9 forming unlawful assembly and armed with deadly weapon made an assault and damaged the Scorpio Car of the complainant and in this regard complaint is filed. However, the applicant has not caused any injury and even co-accused are already arrested and nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the applicant and even cross-complaint is filed in connection with the alleged offence. Hence, as nothing remains to be recovered or discovered from the present applicant, 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 and learned advocate Mr. Sajid Kariyaniya for the original complainant, who appeared through virtual mode, have opposed grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that investigation is at nascent stage and present applicant used the wooden stick as a member of unlawful assembly and caused damage to the scorpio car of the complainant and hence, 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) Applicant is aged 75 years and suffering from various age related ailments;
(2) There is no overt act attributed to the applicant of having caused injury to any person;
(3) Even if the allegations are accepted as it is then also, applicant was merely member of unlawful assembly and after first part of the offence got over, in the second part applicant has participated and broken the windshield of scorpio car and thereafter damaged the car and except this no role attributed to the applicant;
(4) Nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the applicant;
(5) No case for custodial interrogatio
