Anticipatory bail granted based on lack of past criminal record and execution of a repayment agreement, emphasizing judicial discretion in bail matters.

ORDER :

(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.) 

RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent – State of Gujarat.

[1.0] 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.11210025250496 of 2025 registered with Limbayat Police Station, Surat City for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

[2.0] Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and the applicant is falsely enroped in the offence. The allegation is that the complainant had sent gray cloth worth Rs.67,18,865/- through 43 different bills during the period from 18.03.2024 to 15.06.2024 to the present applicant i.e. proprietor of Shubham Fashion however, subsequent to filing of the FIR, the applicant has executed a Memorandum of Understanding dated 12.08.2024 in favor of the complainant pursuant to which the applicant has issued cheques to pay the amount and hence, there is no any allegation against the applicant insofar as offence of cheating or criminal breach of trust is concerned. Applicant is not having any past antecedent hence, now nothing remains to be recovered or discovered from the present applicant and 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.

[3.0] Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent – State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that by winning over the trust and faith of the complainant, applicant has received gray goods worth Rs.67.18 lakh from the complainant and thereafter did not make payment for the same and thus, there was dishonest intention right from the inception and if the applicant is granted bail then the possibility of tampering with the evidence cannot be ruled out. Hence, as custodial interrogation of the applicant is required, he has requested to dismiss the present application.

[4.0] 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 triable by the Court of JMFC;

(2) Prima facie, it appears that the allegation is in nature of commercial transaction whereby it is alleged that applicant received gray cloth worth Rs.67,18,865/- from the complainant through 43 different bills during the period from 18.03.2024 to 15.06.2024 out of which Rs.51,17,958/- is yet to be paid. However, subsequent to filing of the FIR, the applicant has executed a Memorandum of Understanding dated 12.08.2024 in favor of the complainant pursuant to which the applicant has issued cheques to pay the amount and hence, there is no any all