The court emphasized the need for cautious discretion in granting anticipatory bail, considering the nature of the offense and the applicant's willingness to comply with conditions.

ORAL ORDER

1. Rule.Learned APP waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent-State.

2. The present application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11213010240257 of 2024 registered before Dhoraji City Police Station, Rajkot Rural, for the offence under Sections 65(a)(a), 65(b), 65(c), 65(d), 65(f) of the Prohibition Act.

3. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the the applicant is innocent and has not committed the alleged offense. It is stated that based on intelligence received by the Investigating OfÏcer, a raid was conducted under the Prohibition Act on 27-04-2024, occurring between 22:10 and 23:00 hours. Subsequently, another offense under the NDPS Act was registered against the accused, related to the same series of events, resulting in a second FIR and an independent investigation. The learned advocate contends that, considering the nature of the offenses, the applicant should be granted anticipatory bail with suitable conditions imposed.

Learned advocate for the applicant, on instructions, states that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions including imposition of conditions with regard to powers of Investigating Agency to file an application before the competent Court for his remand. He would further submit that upon filing of such application by the Investigating Agency, the right of applicant accused to oppose such application on merits may be kept open.

4. Per contra, learned APP appearing for the respondent- State has opposed this application looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. Learned APP further submitted that prima facie, offence was clearly made out against the present applicant. Ultimately, learned APP for the State has requested to dismiss the present application.

6. I have gone through the thoughtful consideration and the arguments canvassed by the learned advocates for the respective parties. 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) whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence; (ii) nature and gravity of the accusation; (iii) severity of the punishment in the event of conviction; (iv) danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if released on bail; (v) character, behaviour, means, position and standing of the accused; (vi) likelihood of the offence being repeated; (vii) reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being influenced; and (viii) danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail. 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:

i. As per the intelligence received by the Investigating OfÏcer, the raid was conducted and the offence was registered under the Prohibition Act, under Section on 27.04.2024 and the raid was conducted between 22.10 to 23.00 hrs. Thereafter, another offence under the NDPS Act was registered against the accused, but the same series of fact, 2nd FIR is also registered and the independent investigation is going on;

ii. Nothing is required to be recovered and discovered from the accused as the raid was conducted in the presence of pans-witnesses and same series of act another offence is also registered;

iii. offence is not punishable with life or death; Without discussing further the merits of the case, the present application deserves considera