IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 26120 of 2025 ==========================================================

MAHAMMADMUNAF ALAMBHAI PARMAR Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR. BAKUL S PANCHAL(3676) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS.JIRGA JHAVERI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE UTKARSH THAKORBHAI DESAI Date : 11/12/2025

ORAL ORDER

1. The applicant who is apprehending arrest at the hands of Kadi Police Station, Mehsana, has preferred the present application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, praying for anticipatory bail. The offense came to be registered under Sections 69, 78 and 351(3) of the BNSS, 2023 registered vide C.R.

No.I-11206020251026 of 2025.

2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Bakul Panchal on behalf of the applicant, who has reiterated the averments of the application. Mr.Panchal has further stated that the relationship between the applicant and the victim, who was aged 29 years, were consensual in nature. The applicant has not committed any crime. The complainant was knowing that the applicant was married and in spite of knowing the said fact, she was having illicit relationship with the applicant, of her own free will. It was the complainant who had told the applicant that, she would divorce her husband. In fact, the applicant was financially helping the complainant and he having stopped providing her money since last six months, the present FIR came to be lodged and registered, so as to blackmail the applicant.

3. Mr.Panchal in support of his arguments, has relied upon the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Samadhan S/O Sitatram Manmothe v. State of Maharashtra and another rendered in Criminal Appeal No.5001 of 2025, as well as the judgement of our High Court, delivered in case of Marshall Amubhai Vadariya v. State of Gujarat and another rendered in Criminal Misc.

Application No.21237 of 2019

4. Heard learned APP Ms.Jirga Jhaveri for the respondent-State who has strongly objected the application submitting that, the applicant under the pretext of marriage, had entered into physical relationship with the original complainant, and it was he, who had asked the original complainant to seek divorce from her husband so that he would marry her, and it was under such pretext, he had taken the original complainant to various places where, he would have sexual intercourse with the original complainant.

5. Ms.Jhaveri has drawn the attention of the Court towards the statement of the original complainant which came to be recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023, wherein, she has narrated all the facts on oath before the learned JMFC, Mehsana. Hence, this bail application should be rejected.

6. At the outset, the FIR came to be lodged by the prosecutrix on 06.11.2025 against the applicant, wherein, she has narrated that the applicant was harassing her and when she had called to reprimand him, he had told her that he wanted to be her friend, to which, she had denied. She has further mentioned that, the applicant had repeatedly called her and had asked her to marry him, and had subsequently won over her trust, resulting into their relationship. She has also stated that, the applicant had given a mobile phone to her and had helped her financially. It was the applicant who had told her that, he would marry her once she would divorce her husband, and thereafter, had taken her to a hotel where, against her wish, he had sexual intercourse with her. She has also stated that, before eight months of filing of the FIR when she had called the applicant, he had come to Surendranagar and had told her that, she should walk out of her father’s house, and thereafter, he would marry her and would also get her divorced from her husband, and saying so, once again, he had sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. However, thereafter, the