IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 5967 of 2026 ==========================================================

KISHAN S/O SHAMJIBHAI MAKWANA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

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

Appearance:

MR D K TRIVEDI(5283) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 NAISHADH V PANDYA(9114) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MS MEGHA CHITALIYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER Date : 22/04/2026

ORAL ORDER

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.11190002260139 / 2026 registered with Botad Police Station, Botad District for the offences punishable under Sections 78(1)(i) of BNS and Section 11(4), 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012(for short “POCSO Act”). 2. The learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant is 27 years old and is engaged in masonry work and is the sole breadwinner of the family and has the responsibility of maintaining his aged parents. It has been argued that the complainant in the FIR has alleged date of incident to be 22.01.2026 whereas the FIR has been lodged on 02.02.2026 and the applicant is innocent and the applicant has never sexually harassed the victim. Moreover, it has been argued that even if the contents of the FIR are taken into consideration, no specific incidents have been stated in the said FIR, nor has the paper chit being found from the terrace, which is alleged to have been thrown by the applicant giving details of his phone number and no details of when the alleged incident has stated to have taken place and only one incident has been stated that the present applicant had tried to follow the victim at the school and therefore, in view of Section 11(4) of the POCSO Act, a person is said to commit sexual harassment upon a child when such person with sexual intent- repeatedly or constantly follows the victim and therefore, in the present case, no details have been given by the complainant nor are there any allegations of making any obscene gestures to the victim, and therefore, the application is required to be allowed.

3. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms.Megha Chitaliya appearing on behalf of the respondent – State has vehemently opposed the present application and has argued that, if the contents of the FIR are taken into consideration, the age of the victim is 12 years, 8 months and 4 days. It is a specific case that the accused had thrown a paper chit containing his phone number on the terrace and it is also the case of the victim that the accused had told her to call on the said number and when the victim used to go towards the school, he would make obscene gestures to the victim thereby harassing her. It has also been stated that the victim repeatedly and constantly is making obscene gestures to the said victim and therefore, it has been argued that the application is required to be rejected.

4. Heard 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