SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 17969

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Sanjeev J.Thaker, J
Sunitaben Abhishekkumar Aahir – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 12785 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Kishan H Daiya
For the Respondents: Tirthraj Pandya

Anticipatory bail is granted by evaluating the nature of the offence, the applicant's lack of prior criminal records, the absence of necessity for custodial interrogation, and the assurance that the accused will cooperate with the investigation and not flee from justice.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 482 - Indian Penal Code - Sections 420 and 114 - Anticipatory bail - Grant of - Factors to be considered while deciding application for - Nature and gravity of accusation, antecedents of applicant, possibility to flee from justice, and whether accusation is for injury or humiliation to applicant are key considerations. (Para 5)

(B) Bail - Pre-arrest - Conditions - Court granting bail can impose conditions such as cooperating with investigation, restraining from inducing, threatening, or promising any person acquainted with the case, and ensuring non-obstruction of investigation. (Para 7)

Facts of the case:
The applicant sought anticipatory bail in connection with an FIR for alleged cheating and abetment. The dispute centered on the non-clearance of a loan amount despite the execution of a sale deed in favor of the complainant.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the offence was not punishable with life imprisonment or death, the applicant had no previous criminal history, and the applicant expressed willingness to cooperate with the investigation and trial.

Issues: Whether the applicant is entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail in light of the gravity of the allegations and the necessity for custodial interrogation.

Ratio Decidendi: Bail is to be granted based on the necessity of custodial interrogation, the gravity of the offence, and the probability of the accused obstructing justice, provided that the applicant offers full cooperation with the law enforcement authorities and poses no flight risk. (Paras 5, 6)

Result: Application allowed; anticipatory bail granted subject to conditions.

Table of Content
1. initiation of legal proceedings for anticipatory bail. (Para 1 , 2)
2. contentions of parties regarding necessity of custodial interrogation. (Para 3 , 4)
3. judicial criteria and precedents for granting anticipatory bail. (Para 5 , 6)
4. granting conditional bail with procedural directives. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)

ORAL ORDER

1. 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. 11210060260272 of 2026, registered with Varachha Police Station, District: Surat for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule for respondent – State of Gujarat.

3. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the nature of allegations are such that custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. It is further submitted that the applicant will keep himself available during the course of investigation and trial also and will not flee from justice.

3.1 The learned advocate for the applicant further states 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.

4. As against this, the 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 and requested not to entertain this application.

5. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and perusing the papers available on record, it is incumbent upon the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously, cautiously and strictly in compliance with the basic principles laid down in plethora of decisions of the 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 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 bail an elaborate examination of evidence and detailed reasons touching the merits of the case, which may prejudice the case of accused, should be avoided. However, prima facie, following aspects have been taken into consideration:

a) the offence is not punishable with life imprisonment or death penalty;

b) the applicant has no past antecedents;

c) the learned advocate for the applicant has assured that the applicant will not flee from justice and would be available during investigation as well as the trial.

d) the entire dispute is with respect to not clearing the loan amount and the sale deed is already executed in favour of the present complainant.

6. Considering the aforesaid aspects and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others , 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 & Others, 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, the Court is inclined to allow the present application.

7. In the result, this application is allowed by directing that in the event of arrest/ appearance of the applicant in connection with the above-referred FIR, the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (R

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top