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) 18089

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Sanjeev J. Thaker, J
Vasantkumar Lallubhai Patel – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 11893 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: A S Timbalia, Mo.Aslam M Shaikh
For the Respondents: Tirthraj Pandya

Anticipatory bail is granted by assessing the nature and gravity of accusations, the applicant's criminal antecedents, potential for flight, and the necessity of custodial interrogation. Discretionary power is exercised to balance the interests of justice and personal liberty while ensuring the applicant's availability for the investigation.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 482 - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 316(5) and 54 - Anticipatory bail - Nature and gravity of accusation - Absence of past antecedents - Assured cooperation by applicant - The Court is required to exercise its discretion judiciously, considering factors like the nature and gravity of the accusation, the antecedents of the applicant, the possibility of fleeing justice, and whether the accusation is made with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant. (Paras 5, 6)

Facts of the case:
The applicant sought anticipatory bail in connection with an FIR pertaining to a dispute arising from the delivery of goods on credit and subsequent non-payment, despite the issuance of a cheque.

Findings of Court:
The Court noted the absence of past criminal history and the applicant's willingness to cooperate. The dispute was essentially civil in nature, concerning commercial transactions, and custodial interrogation was deemed unnecessary.

Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant was entitled to pre-arrest bail given the nature of the offence and the necessity of custodial interrogation for a matter arising from a credit-based commercial dispute.

Ratio Decidendi: The decision balances the state's investigative needs with the applicant's liberty, concluding that bail is appropriate where there is no likelihood of flight or tampering with the investigatory process, particularly when the underlying allegation is a commercial or contractual dispute.

Result: Application allowed; anticipatory bail granted with conditions.

Table of Content
1. assessment of anticipatory bail under bnss. (Para 1 , 2)
2. conflicting stances on custodial interrogation requirements. (Para 3 , 4)
3. judicial criteria and precedents for bail grants. (Para 5 , 6)
4. granting conditional bail with procedural caveats. (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. 11210054260398 of 2026, registered with Sachin City Police Station, District: Surat City for the offences punishable under Sections 316(5) and 54 of the BNS, 2023.

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 dispute pertains to the delivery of the goods on credit and the subsequent non-payment for those goods, despite the fact that the cheque was also issued to the complainant.

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.

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/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with one surety of like amount on the following condition

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