ORDER :

P. M. RAVAL, J.

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

2. 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. 11219007260131/2026, registered with Vaghai Police Station, District: Dang for the offences punishable under Section 69 of the BNS, 2023.

3. 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.

3.1 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.

3.2 Learned advocate Mr. Munjal V. Acharya submits that the present FIR is belated, inasmuch as the alleged incident is stated to have occurred during the period from 01.01.2025 to 14.01.2026, whereas the FIR came to be lodged on 27.03.2026, after a delay of more than one year and two months, without any plausible explanation. Learned advocate further submits that the complaint has been filed only because the applicant’s engagement has taken place with another girl. It is contended that the applicant and the victim were in a consensual love relationship, and any physical relationship between them was established with the free consent of the victim. It is also submitted that the applicant has no past criminal antecedents. Therefore, the very lodging of the FIR reflects that it has been filed with an oblique motive to pressurize the applicant into marrying the complainant.

4. 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.

4.1 Per contra, learned APP Mr. Rohan Raval submits that a prima facie case of rape is clearly made out, attracting Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. It is further submitted that there are WhatsApp chats between the applicant and the victim, which substantiate the allegations. Learned APP contends that the applicant had made a false promise of marriage to the victim and, under such pretext, established a physical relationship, thereby exploiting her. On these grounds, it is urged that the present application be rejected.

5. 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) In Prasant v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2025) 5 SCC 764 the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that a mere breakup of a relationship between