IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 374 of 2026 ==========================================================

KOLI PATEL SANTOSH KANUBHAI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

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

Appearance:

MR MUNJAL V ACHARYA(10678) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR LB DABHI ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL Date : 19/02/2026 ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr.Munjal Acharya for the appellant, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. L.B.Dabhi on behalf of the respondent-State and learned advocate Ms. Chetna Joshi submits that she has instructions to appear on behalf of first informant and according to learned advocate the complainant is present in the Court.

2. Learned advocate Ms. Joshi request for permission to file her Vakalatnama. Permission is granted.

3. Rule. Learned APP Mr.Dabhi waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent-State and Ms. Joshi waives service of rule on behalf of original complainant.

4. The present appellant having been arraigned as accused in the FIR bearing C.R. No.11192008250641 of 2025 registered with Bavla Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 69 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and under 3(2)(v) of Atrocity Act., has approached this Court inter alia seeking for anticipatory bail.

5. Learned Advocate for the appellant submits that the nature of allegations are such for which custodial interrogation at this stage may not be necessary. Besides, the appellant is available during the course of investigation and will not flee from justice. In view of the above, the appellant may be granted anticipatory bail.

5.1 Learned Advocate for the appellant on instructions states that the appellant 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 appellant -accused to oppose such application on merits may be kept open.

6. 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.

7. Heard learned Advocate for the respective parties who have not submitted anything further.

8. Considering the submissions made by learned Advocate Mr. Acharya and learned APP Mr. Dabhi and considering the investigation papers, following aspect are taken into consideration by this Court:

[1] The allegation being that the complainant had been raped by the accused, more particularly, after promising for marriage and whereas it is now submitted that the parties have amicably settled the issue among themselves. [2] The affidavit of the complainant being tendered by learned advocate Ms. Joshi is taken on record, whereby have supported the version of the settlement.

9. Having regard to the circumstances in question, and considering the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. reported in (2011)1 SCC 694, this Court is inclined to consider this appeal.

10. In the result, the present appeal is allowed by directing that in the event of appellant herein being arrested pursuant to C.R. No.11192008250641 of 2025 registered with Bavla Police Station, Ahmedabad the appellant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with one surety of like amount, on the following conditions:

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

(b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 25.02.2025 between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.;

(c) shall mark his presence at the c