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. 11208003260011 of 2026, registered with Gandhigram / University (Gandhigram-2) Police Station, Rajkot City, for the offence punishable under Sections 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is alleged by the complainant that the forged Will be misusing the notary registration number of a deceased lawyer and thereafter used the said Will as a genuine document with dishonest intention, on the basis of which the applicant apprehends her impending arrest in connection with the aforesaid FIR. The applicant had preferred an application seeking anticipatory bail in connection with the said FIR before learned Additional District Judge, Rajkot, being Criminal Misc. Application No.99 of 2026, which came to be dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, vide order dated 17.01.2026. Hence, the present application.

4. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Harshit S. Tolia appearing with learned advocate Mr. Maulik M. Soni and learned advocate Mr. Viral K. Rana for the applicant would submit that applicant is a lady aged about 44 years and suffering for HIV disease and the allegations in the FIR are false, frivolous and baseless, and have been made within mala-fide intention only to harass the applicant and to pressurize her in a civil property dispute existed between the family members. Learned Senior advocate would further submit that the entire dispute relates to property which is civil in nature. Inasmuch as the present applicant and her son who is from her earlier marriage, had given, consenting, grant of heirship certificate under the Indian Succession Act, and on the other hand, Darshita, who is the legal heir of deceased Vinodbhai had agreed to hand over rupees one crore under different heads, for the betterment of the present applicant and her son, and when Darshita has backed out from the said agreement, just to give colour of criminal proceedings, and pressurize the present applicant and her son in civil property dispute, has lodged the present FIR.

4.1. Learned Senior Advocate would further submit that the genuineness or otherwise of the Will, as a matter of evidence can only be decided after a trial, and not at the stage of registration of FIR, hence, the present FIR is nothing but patent abuse of process of law.

4.2. Learned Senior Advocate upon instruction has also made a statement that the applicant is ready and willing to deposit the Will before the concerned Court or Investigating Agency, and would further submit that the present Will has not been utilized anywhere to gain any advantage, and thus, argued to allow the present application.

4.3. He would also submit that the nature of allegations are as such that custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. It would also state that the applicant will keep herself available during the course of investigation and trial also and will not flee from justice.

4.4. It would further state 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.

5. Per contra, learned advocate Mr. Zubin Bharda appearing with learned advocate Mr. Krunal L. Shahi for the complainant would submit that on 20.04.2024, the complainant received a cover containing a notice and a copy of the Will executed on 15.03.2017, being Register No. 802 and Serial No. V-31, wherein the brother-in law of the complainant, namely Vinodbhai has transferred all his properties to the present applicant’s son – Tilak, wherein also someone had forced the signature of the complainant, as a witne