Anticipatory bail may be granted based on the applicant's cooperation and lack of prior criminal record, despite serious allegations.

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 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (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.11198006250037 of 2025 registered with Ghogha Road Police Station, Bhavnagar for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120(b) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC”) / The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”). .

2. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and he is falsely implicated in the offence. It is submitted that the prosecution alleges that since 12.06.2023, the original informant has been serving as the Regional Head (AGM) at the Bank of Baroda's Bhavnagar office. Under a government scheme for small-scale industries, loans were sanctioned based on applications verified by the bank’s Branch Manager and Credit Officer. However, an audit in April 2023 revealed that multiple loans were granted using forged quotations and invoices. Upon verification, the required machinery was found missing at the business locations. Some accused repaid the loans after receiving notices, while others failed to do so. Allegedly, the bank officials did not follow SOPs, and the accused colluded to fraudulently obtain loans, causing a financial loss of Rs.1,01,35,341/-. The present applicant is doing business and he has not played any active role in the offence. He has already paid the entire loan amount. There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the present applicant. It is further submitted that, considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be granted bail with the imposition of suitable conditions.

3. The learned APP, appearing on behalf of the respondent State, has opposed the grant of bail, considering the nature and gravity of the offence. It is submitted that the present applicant siphoned off a huge amount in collusion with the Bank Manager and co-accused. They forged invoices and quotations to receive the subsidy amount in their accounts. The applicant has submitted the forged documents to obtain the loan. Therefore, the present application may be dismissed.

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. Prima facie, it appears that only allegation against the present applicant is that he has received subsidy amount by forging documents and submitted to the Bank. So far present applicant is concerned, he is ready and willing to deposit Rs.8,91,784/- by installments.

2. The applicant has not taken undue advantage.

3. No any financial benefit is gained by the applicant.

4. The applicant has no past antecedent.

5. No civil suit is filed.

6. Co-accused is enlarged by this Court and therefore, on the ground of parit