Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J
Bagdiya Chirag Labhubhai – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
ORDER :
[1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice for the respondent-State of Gujarat.
[2.0] 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. 11192011240756 of 2024 registered with Bopal Police Station, Ahmedabad Rural for the offence punishable under Sections 61, 316(2), 319(2), 336(2), 336(3), 336(4), 338 and 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) and sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act.
[3.0] Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the applicant herein is not named in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Further, there is no any allegation against the present applicant and he is neither in contact with the complainant nor has received any payment from the complainant. The present applicant is implicated only on the basis of statement of one Vivek Vadodaria which has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. In the said statement it has been stated that present applicant has received Rs.4 lakh which has g
The court emphasized that anticipatory bail should not be granted if it hampers investigation, especially in cases involving economic offences.
Anticipatory bail should be granted only in exceptional cases; the court must balance individual rights with societal interests, especially in serious economic offences.
Anticipatory bail denied due to serious allegations of fraud, necessity for custodial interrogation, and applicants' absconding status.
Anticipatory bail is not an absolute right, especially in economic offences, where the court must balance personal liberty against the need for effective investigation.
The court reaffirms that anticipatory bail is not to be granted where there is substantial evidence indicating involvement in serious offences affecting societal interests.
Anticipatory bail should not be granted in serious economic offences where there is a risk of evidence tampering and ongoing investigations.
Anticipatory bail should be denied when the accused has a history of similar offenses, as it poses a risk of tampering with evidence and undermines the investigation.
Anticipatory bail can be denied if the gravity of the offence and need for custodial interrogation outweigh individual rights, emphasizing the balance between personal liberty and public interest.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
