Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(GUJ) 955
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J
VANDANABEN MAHENDRABHAI BAWA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 2879 of 2025
Anticipatory bail granted due to lack of past criminal record, nature of accusations, and settlement between parties, emphasizing judicial discretion in bail applications.
Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 482 - Anticipatory bail - Application for anticipatory bail granted based on the applicant's lack of past antecedents, the nature of the accusations, and the settlement between parties - The court emphasized the need for judicious discretion in bail applications. (Paras 4, 5, 6)
(B) Bail considerations - Factors include the nature and gravity of the accusation, antecedents of the applicant, and the possibility of fleeing from justice. (Paras 4, 5)
Facts of the case:
The applicant, daughter-in-law of the complainant, is accused of property-related offences, which she claims were settled and reversed. She is willing to cooperate with the investigation and has no prior criminal record.
Findings of Court:
The court found no necessity for custodial interrogation and noted the applicant's cooperation and the settlement of disputes.
Issues: The main issues were the nature of the accusations and the necessity for custodial interrogation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the applicant's lack of past criminal history and the absence of a need for custodial interrogation justified granting anticipatory bail, following established legal principles. (Paras 4, 5)
Result: Application for anticipatory bail allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant's relationship and allegations (Para 1) |
| 2. defense's claim of innocence (Para 2) |
| 3. prosecution's opposition to bail (Para 3) |
| 4. factors for bail consideration (Para 4 , 5) |
| 5. bail granted with conditions (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
ORAL ORDER
RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1 – 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 has prayed to release on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11199035240387 of 2024 registered with Dahej Marine Police Station, Bharuch, for the offences punishable under Sections 316, 318(4), 338, 336(3), 351(2), 352, 115(2) and 34 of BNS.
[2.0] Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence. The applicant is daughter-in-law of the complainant and it is alleged that the applicant has transferred the property and got her name mutated in the property. However, the transactions are reversed and whatever the documents executed in her name are reversed. Allegation of forgery part is concerned, it was created by her husband. Subsequently, due to family relationship, the complainant and accused have entered into settlement and filed quashing petition before this court. Possession of car is handed over to the complainant. Even otherwise, the applicant is ready and willing to join the investigation. Further, the applicant is not having any past antecedent. 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 looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. He has submitted that present applicant with an intention to grab the property, forged documents and got mutated her name in the property. Further, the applicant has used money of sister in law and purchased the car. Subsequently, the transaction of property is reversed and car is handed over to the complainant is not a ground to grant anticipatory bail. Custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. Hence, 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/ her 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;
(2) Applicant is lady accused and not having any past antecedent;
(3) No case of custodial interrogation made out by the prosecution.
(4) Transaction is already reversed and car is handed over to the complainant. Now nothing is required to be recovered from the applicant.
(5) Even otherwise, due to family relationship, the applicant and complainant have settled the dispute.
