ORAL ORDER

1. By way of the present application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’), the applicant has prayed for anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in connection with the FIR being 11191039260075 of 2026 registered with the Sabarmati Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 192, 196(1), 196(1)(A), 196(1)(B), 353, 296(B) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘the BNS’).

2. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent – State.

3. Learned advocate for the applicant has argued that the applicant has nothing to do with the alleged transaction; and that the entire offence is a reaction video based on the original video posted by someone else; and that no offence is made out against the applicant as it is clear from the avements made in the FIR itself; and that from the FIR also does not state that the applicant has committed any offence; and that prima facie offence as alleged in the FIR is not made out; and that there is no criminal case of similar nature having been registered against the applicant in the past. It is submitted that this application may be allowed.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed this application. It is submitted that there is clear suppression of material facts by the applicant before this Court while filing the present application; and that there is a criminal case being C.R.No.11191067230010 of 2023 which is pending before the Cyber Crime Police Station, Ahmedabad for the similar offence under Section 153, 153(A) (1), 153(B)(1) and 505(1) of the BNS Act; and that the applicant is habitual in posting videos on social medias whereby communal harmony is being disturbed. It is submitted that as the applicant is directly involved in the commission of offence in question, custodial interrogation is necessary and the presence of the applicant is required for further investigation. It is submitted that the present application is required to be rejected.

5.1 Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties and having gone through the material produced on record, including the police papers, this Court finds that the FIR clearly states that to express hatred against a community with the potential to cause social harm including violence; and that the same may also cause riots; and the evidence on record links the present applicant; and that the applicant must disclose all material facts relevant to their case and failure to do so constitutes an abuse of process; and that while seeking bail, the applicant in under solemn obligation to make a fair, complete and candidate disclosure of all the facts having direct baring on the exercise of the judicial discretion; and that at Ground-4(D) of the application, it has been stated that at the time of release of movie ‘Pathan’, the applicant had reacted, but has stated that thereafter, the matter was over and there was no case of criminal nature that has been registered against the applicant in the past, but from the communication / report of the investigating agency which is placed on record by the learned APP during the course of hearing today, it transpires that earlier, there is a case registered against the applicant in past as noted above, which facts have not been disclosed by the applicant in the present application and therefore, even on the ground of suppression concealment of selective disclosure of material fact, the same amounts to an abuse of process of law and strikes at the very root of administration of criminal justice; and that in the present case, the applicant has deliberately concealed his criminal antecedents before this Court in the present application and there was only partial disclosure made in the affidavit, therefore, the said conduct cannot be viewed as an isolated lapse, therefore, even on the said ground, the present appl