Judicial discretion in granting anticipatory bail must consider the gravity of accusations and the applicant's past conduct, ensuring justice while avoiding prejudice.

ORDER :

1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.

2. 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.11210067250091 of 2025 registered with Saroli Police Station, Aravalli for the offences punishable under Section 409, 420, 120(b) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “ IPC ”) / The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”).

3. 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 further submitted that, considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be granted bail with the imposition of suitable conditions.

4. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. Therefore, the present application may be dismissed.

7. 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) The allegations against the present applicant are that the applicant, along with co-accused traders Mahavir Shantilal Mehta (owner of Arihant Silk), Vinodkumar Babulalji Jain (owner of Kanak Creation), Jethmal alias Jayesh alias Munimji Nathulal Jain (administrator of Kanak Creation), and Kalusing Deora (owner of R.K. Fashion), conspired together and purchased goods worth a total of Rs.1,6073,947/- from the complainant but failed to make the payment. They repeatedly delayed payments with various excuses and, to date, have not cleared the outstanding amount. They have cheated the complainant, shut down their shops, absconded, and fled to an unknown location.

(2) Prima facie, it appears that the case is commercial in nature.

(3) Nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the present applicant.

8. Considering the aforesaid aspects and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. reported in (2011) 1 SCC 6941, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. reported in (1980) 2 SCC 665 and also the decision in the case of Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, I am inclined to allow the present application.

9. In the result, the present application is allowed by directing that in the event of arrest / appearance of the applicant in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11210067250091 of 2025 registered with Saroli Police Station, Aravalli the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions that applicant :

(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required;

(b) shall