Table of Content
1. allegations of mob assault and the applicant's request for anticipatory bail based on medical grounds and denial of intent. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 6)
2. prima facie involvement in a violent offence necessitates custodial interrogation for a fair investigation. (Para 5 , 10)
3. balancing individual liberty with the larger interests of society and the requirements of justice. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. dismissal of the anticipatory bail application due to the necessity of custodial interrogation. (Para 11 , 12)

ORAL ORDER

RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1 – State of Gujarat.

1. By way of the present application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the applicant – accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11192050250730 OF 2025 registered with Sanand Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 117(2), 118(1), 115(2), 125(a), 351(3), 189(2), 191(2), 191(3) and 190 of BNSS Act and Section 135 of the G.P. Act .

2. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the applicant is wrongly arraigned as accused; that he has not committed the crime as alleged; that the applicant is senior citizen and suffering from several medical issues; that there was no intention to cause bodily injury, that the injured persons were discharged from the hospital and out of danger and can do their routine work properly; that there are no chances of tampering with the evidence or witnesses. He, therefore, prayed to release him on anticipatory bail.

3. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent has vehemently opposed the present application on the ground that the applicant is facing charges under 109(1), 117(2), 118(1), 115(2), 125(a), 351(3), 189(2), 191(2), 191(3) and 190 of BNSS Act. The applicant is explicitly named in the First Information Report as accused no.7. The F.I.R. clearly shows the role of the present applicant, in view of the fact that the applicant had caused injuries to the complainant on the face by pelting stones. That the custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary to go the root of the matter and get assistance in fair investigation.

5. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties, this Court has considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for both the sides and considered the material placed on record. It is well settled that, among other circumstances, the factors to be borne in mind while considering an application for bail are

(i) whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence;

(ii) nature and gravity of the accusation;

(iii) severity of the punishment in the event of conviction;

(iv) danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if released on bail;

(v) character, behaviour, means, position and standing of the accused.

Though at the stage of granting bail execution and appreciation of evidence is not permissible. Having gone through the complaint, prima facie, it appears that the present applicant is involved in the offence.

6. It transpires from the papers that the role of the applicant is clearly stated in the FIR wherein she has tried to assault the wife of the complainant on the face and because of the same, she had to take three stitches in the internal side of the face and two stitches at the external side and the applicant was a part of the mob who had assaulted the complainant, whereby accused no.2 was holding dhariya in his hand and with an intention to kill the son of the complainant, had assaulted the son of the complainant Salim on his head and accused no.1 was holding iron pipe and assaulted the grandson of the complainant on his head and left leg; the accused nos.3,4,5 and 6 had thrashed the son and grandson of the complainant, the acc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document