Back
2025 Supreme(GUJ) 691
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J
SANKAJI RANCHHODJI THAKOR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 6280 of 2025
Anticipatory bail granted based on lack of direct involvement in misappropriation and cooperation in investigation, emphasizing judicial discretion in bail applications.
Headnote:
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 482 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 409 and 114 - Anticipatory bail application - Applicants, members of a managing committee, alleged negligence leading to misappropriation of funds by the society's Secretary - No direct benefit to applicants, willingness to cooperate in investigation - Court emphasized the need for judicious discretion in bail applications, considering nature of accusation and likelihood of custodial interrogation - Application allowed for two applicants with conditions imposed. (Paras 1.0, 4.0, 6.0)
Facts of the case:
Applicants sought anticipatory bail in connection with FIR for misappropriation of Rs.47.11 lakh, asserting false implication due to their committee membership. They expressed readiness to join the investigation. (Paras 2.0, 3.0)
Findings of Court:
The court found no necessity for custodial interrogation, highlighting the applicants' lack of direct involvement in financial gain and the documentary nature of evidence. (Paras 4.0, 5.0)
Issues: The primary issue was whether the applicants' alleged negligence warranted custodial interrogation and the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail. (Para 4.0)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the nature of accusations and the applicants' willingness to cooperate mitigated the need for custodial interrogation, aligning with precedent on bail considerations. (Paras 5.0, 6.0)
Result: Application allowed for applicants Nos.2 and 3 with conditions. (Para 8.0)
ORDER :
At the outset, learned advocate for the applicants does not press the present application qua applicant No.1 and hence, present application is disposed of as not pressed qua applicant No.1 – SANKAJI RANCHHODJI THAKOR.
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 applicants accused have prayed to release them on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11216009240686 of 2024 registered with Mansa Police Station, District Gandhinagar for the offences punishable under Sections 409 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. Learned advocate for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the offence only because they are members of the managing committee of the society and have committed negligence in performing their duty due to which the Secretary of the society has misappropriated Rs.47.11 lakh of the society with which the present applicants are not connected however, the applicants are ready and willing to join the investigation and hence, now nothing remains to be recovered or discovered from the present applicants and therefore, custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. Besides, the applicants are 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 on the ground that though applicants are the members of the Managing Committee of the Society, who have been negligent in performing their duties due to which Secretary of the Society has misappropriated huge amount of Rs.47.11 lakh and in this regard, statement of Secretary is recorded before the Auditor Grade-II (Milk), Milk Audit Office, Mahesana wherein also the Secretary i.e. accused No.1 has admitted that he misappropriated the said amount. 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) Offence is not punishable with life imprisonment or death penalty and is triable by the Court of JMFC;
(2) The only allegation against the applicants is that they remained negligent in performing their duty as the member of the Managing Committee due to which the Secretary of Shree Dhameda Milk Producers’ Co-operative Society Ltd. misappropriated an amount of Rs.47.11 lakh however, the applicants have not got any monetary benefit;
(3) Present case is based on documentary evidence;
(4) Nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the present application;
(5) No case for custodial interrogation is made out.
5. Considering the aforesaid aspects and the law laid down by th
