ORDER

1) By way of present Anticipatory Bail application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the applicant-original accused has prayed to grant anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR registered at Viramgam Rural Police Station, Ahmedabad Rural, being C.R No.11192060250515 of 2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 61(2), 117(3), 189(2), 189(4), 191(2), 191(3), 351(3) and 352 of the BNS.

2) The case of the prosecution is that the informant, Ashwin Singh Balwantsinh Vaghela, who works as a driver, was returning from Nestle India Pvt. Ltd., Chharodi, to Kadi in an Eeco car bearing No. GJ 18-BW-0350 during the night of 14.10.2025. At about 10:25 PM, near Sachana Railway Gate, the vehicle broke down. Therefore, the informant and three workers started pushing the car for about 50 meters towards Kalyanpura. It is alleged that while the car was stationary, five unidentified persons aged around 35 to 40 years arrived in a white Celerio car without a number plate. They were armed with sticks, scythe and iron pipes. The prosecution alleges that these persons assaulted the informant indiscriminately, causing serious injuries and fractures on both his legs and hands, including fractures below the right knee, left knee, right elbow, and left palm. The informant further alleges that the reason for the attack was an earlier incident that took place about 3 to 4 months prior, in which the applicant, Jayeshbhai Chhaganbhai Desai, was allegedly assaulted by some persons from Katosan village. According to the informant, the applicant suspected that the informant had provided information about his whereabouts to those persons. Therefore, it is alleged that the applicant, along with five unidentified persons, hatched a pre-planned conspiracy to take revenge on the informant. Accordingly, the FIR being I-C.R. No. 11192060250150 of 2025 came to be registered with Viramgam Rural Police Station

3) Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present offence only on the basis of suspicion and there is no direct or reliable evidence against him. It is submitted that the applicant was not present at the place of incident and his name has been involved only because of an earlier incident in which the applicant himself was assaulted. It is further submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR and has no connection with the alleged offence or with the five unidentified assailants mentioned in the FIR. There is no material to show any contact, meeting, or conspiracy between the applicant and the co-accused persons. No call records, messages, or other evidence have been produced to support the allegation of criminal conspiracy. It is also submitted that at the time of the incident, the applicant was not present at the spot and there is no need for custodial interrogation or recovery from him. Except for the statement of co-accused, there is no direct evidence against the applicant and such statement is not admissible in evidence. It is further submitted that the applicant is not a habitual offender within the meaning of the Bombay Habitual Offenders Act, 1959, more particularly as defined in Section 2. Therefore, it is requested to allow the present anticipatory bail application.

4) Learned counsel for the applicant has relied on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Asha Dubey vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, reported in 2025 INSC 725, and submitted that, in the event of declaration under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C, it is not as if in all cases that there will be a total embargo on considering the application for the grant of anticipatory bail. Also relined on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of P Krishna Mohan Reddy Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.7532/2025).

5) Learned advocate for the applicant, on instructions, states that the applicant is not absconder. Subsequ