IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 8010 of 2026 ==========================================================

SANGITABEN MANISHBHAI PATEL Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR P P MAJMUDAR(5284) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 RAVI V DESAI(8443) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL Date : 07/04/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Learned advocate Mr. Ruchit J. Vyas states that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent No. 2 herein – original complainant and shall file his Vakalatnama before the Registry. Registry to accept his Vakalatnama.

2. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule for respondent – State of Gujarat.

3. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”), the applicant has prayed for anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11201001260001 of 2026, registered with C.I.D. Crime Gandhinagar Zone Police Station, District: Gandhinagar for the offences alleged therein.

4. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the nature of allegations are such that custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. It is further submitted that the applicant will keep himself available during the course of investigation and trial also and will not flee from justice.

4.1 The learned advocate for the applicant further states that the applicant shall abide by all the conditions that may be imposed while granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. Accordingly, it is urged that this application may be allowed and to grant the anticipatory bail to the applicant.

5. As against this, the 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 and requested not to entertain this application.

6. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and perusing the papers available on record, it is incumbent upon the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously, cautiously and strictly in compliance with the basic principles laid down in plethora of decisions of the 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 so arrested. Though at the stage of granting bail an elaborate examination of evidence and detailed reasons touching the merits of the case, which may prejudice the case of accused, should be avoided. However, following aspects have been taken into consideration:

a) The applicants are the owners of R.D. Trading Firm and had purchased material from Nev. The directors/partners of Nev are the mother and wife of the original accused No. 1, and it is alleged that the selling price was thereby inflated to the detriment of the complainant company, namely Bankai.

b) The applicants, however, have no connection with the original accused persons. It is further alleged that the amount earned by the applicants out of the said transactions is approximately Rs. 7 lakh.

c) The complainant has no objection if anticipatory bail is granted to the applicants.

d) the applicant has no past antecedents;

e) the learned advocate for the applicant has assured that the applicant will not flee from justice and would be available during investigation as well as the tr