IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 26267 of 2025 ==========================================================

GIRISHKUMAR RANCHODBHAI SHAH Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MEHUL A SURATI(7870) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS. JIRGA JHAVERI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE UTKARSH THAKORBHAI DESAI Date : 03/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for respondent – State of Gujarat.

2. By way of the present 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.11191036250123 of 2025 registered with Navrangpura Police Station, District Ahmedabad for the alleged offences as mentioned in the FIR.

3. Learned advocate Mr. Mehul A Surati for the applicant submits that, the nature of allegations are such for which, custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. He submits that the applicant is falsely implicated in the case and has not committed any such offence as alleged in the FIR. He further submits that, the applicant will keep himself available during the course of investigation and the trial, and will not flee from justice, and will abide by all the conditions that may be imposed while releasing him on anticipatory bail. Learned advocate therefore submitted that, considering the above facts, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.

4. 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.

5. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and perusing the investigation papers, it is incumbent upon the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously, cautiously and strictly in compliance with the basic principles laid down in a plethora of decisions of the Hon’ble 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 anticipatory 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 anticipatory bail, an elaborate examination of evidence and detailed reasons touching the merits of the case, which may prejudice the accused should be avoided. I have considered the following aspects.

A) The applicant is a permanent resident of Ahmedabad, hence would be available during the course of investigation as well as during the trial.

B) The applicant does not have any criminal antecedents.

C) The FIR has been filed after a delay of 06 years.

D) The applicant came to be appointed as Director of Swastik Co. Op. Credit Society Ltd. only on 01.08.2021.

E) The office bearers have already instituted civil cases as well as complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the defaulters who were not repaying the loan amounts.

6. Considering the aforesaid aspects and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. reported in (2011) 1 SCC 6941, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. reported in (1980) 2 SCC 665 and also the decision in the case of Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, I am inclined to allow the present application.

7. Th