1. An application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, regarding alleged offences registered under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 35537
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Sanjeev J. Thaker, J
Ashokbhai Jugalkishor Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 23623 of 2026
Important Points
Anticipatory bail is granted by evaluating the gravity of the offence, the applicant's antecedents, flight risk, and the specific role attributed to the accused, balancing individual liberty with the requirements of the investigation.
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail
Act Referred
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: S.482, S.483(2)
Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita: S.318(4), S.336(3), S.338, S.340(2), S.329(3), S.351(3), S.61(2), S.3(5)
Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita: S.318(4), S.336(3), S.338, S.340(2), S.329(3), S.351(3), S.61(2), S.3(5)
Headnote
(A) Anticipatory Bail - Factors for Consideration - The court must exercise discretion judiciously by considering the nature and gravity of the accusation, the antecedents of the applicant, the possibility of fleeing from justice, and whether the accusation was made to humiliate the applicant. (Para 5)
(B) Criminal Procedure - Role of Accused - Where the role attributed to the applicant is limited to being a witness to a document with a fabricated signature and the applicant has no past antecedents, the court may grant anticipatory bail. (Para 5)
Issues: Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail given the nature of the allegations and his specific role in the alleged offence.
Result: Application allowed.
(B) Criminal Procedure - Role of Accused - Where the role attributed to the applicant is limited to being a witness to a document with a fabricated signature and the applicant has no past antecedents, the court may grant anticipatory bail. (Para 5)
Issues: Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail given the nature of the allegations and his specific role in the alleged offence.
Result: Application allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Pritesh M Shah
For the Respondents: Krutarth K Desai, Rohan Shah
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Pritesh M Shah
For the Respondents: Krutarth K Desai, Rohan Shah
Table of Contents
2. The applicant asserted that custodial interrogation is unnecessary and promised cooperation with the investigation, while the State opposed the application emphasizing the gravity of the offences. (Para 3 , 4 )
3. The court analyzed the nature of the accusations, the applicant's lack of criminal antecedents, and the assurance of judicial compliance to determine whether custodial interrogation was warranted. (Para 5 , 6 )
4. Anticipatory bail may be granted by balancing the gravity of accusations, antecedents, and the possibility of fleeing justice, ensuring the applicant remains available for investigation and trial. (Para 7 , 8 )
5. The court allowed the application for anticipatory bail subject to specified conditions, including cooperation with the investigation and furnishing of personal bonds. (Para 7 , 9 )
6. What primary factors must a court consider when deciding an application for anticipatory bail?
The court must consider the nature and gravity of the accusation, the applicant's criminal antecedents, the possibility of the applicant fleeing justice, and whether the accusation is intended to injure or humiliate the applicant. (Para 5 )
7. Does granting anticipatory bail restrict the investigative agency's powers?
Granting anticipatory bail does not limit or restrict the police or investigative agency's rights or duties to investigate the charges against the applicant. (Para 8 )
8. Can an order for anticipatory bail be revisited if an applicant violates bail conditions?
Yes, if an applicant violates bail conditions such as absconding or non-cooperation, the police or investigating agency may move the trial court for a direction to arrest the accused. (Para 7 )
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. 11210065261027 of 2026, registered with Utran Police Station, District: Surat for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 329(3), 351(3), 61(2), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita .
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) Considering the facts of the present case, the role attributed to the present applicant is of being witness to the power of attorney executed by the accused no.2, the fact remains that the accused no.2, his signature has been fabricated;
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 conditions that applicant:
(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make available for interrogation whenever required;
(b) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducemen
