Gujarat High Court
Tejendra @ Tejas Jitendra Solanki vs State Of Gujarat on 6 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/11996/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 06/08/2025
undefined
Reserved On : 31/07/2025
Pronounced On : 06/08/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO.
11996 of 2025
==========================================================
TEJENDRA @ TEJAS JITENDRA SOLANKI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance:
MR BM MANGUKIYA(437) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS BELA A PRAJAPATI(1946) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR PRAVIN GONDALIYA(1974) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR NIRAJ SHARMA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI CAV ORDER
1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for respondent - State of Gujarat.
2. By way of the present 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.11210030250425 of 2025 registered with the Mahidharpura Police Station, Surat City for the alleged offences as mentioned in the FIR.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. B. M. Mangukiya for the applicant, learned APP Mr. Niraj Sharma for respondent - State and learned advocate Mr. Page 1 of 16 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Wed Aug 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 00:35:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/11996/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined Pravin Gondaliya for the original complainant.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Mangukiya appearing for the applicant submits that the so-called incident is occurred during the period between 01.06.2024 to 17.05.2025 and FIR is registered on 17.05.2025 against total two accused persons, wherein, name of the applicant is mentioned at serial No.2. He further submits that accused No.1 is the father of the applicant. He further submits that applicant herein is not directly or indirectly connected and/or associated with the commission of crime, in spite of that, he has been dragged by the complainant. He further submits that in fact at the time of registration of the FIR, complainant has come with the specific case that total Rs.22,58,000/- has been given to various persons in 21 installments on different dates.
He further submits that the name of the persons to whom the money is given as well as the date on which the money is given by the complainant is described in very graphical manner and if the Hon'ble Court would make cursory glance upon the chart, in that event, it would have been found out that only Rs.4 lakh is given to the accused persons and rest of the amount was given to other partners of the accused No.1 and they were not arraigned as accused. He further submits that in fact pursuant to the registration of the FIR, the custody of the luxury buses purchased Page 2 of 16 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Wed Aug 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 00:35:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/11996/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined by the accused persons have been taken by the police and therefore in absence of those vehicles, applicant could not earn any income. He further submits that it is the specific case of the prosecution that accused No.1 and other persons have given assurance to the complainant that whatever profit they will earn from the business of transportation, Rs.60,000/- per month would be paid to her. He submits that in fact thereafter some disputes have been cropped up between the partners of the firm and some of the partners have retired and name of the firm was also changed, due to which, no profit was earned from the said business. He further submits that at the end of the day, if the investigating agency would be in a position to prove the allegations levelled against the accused, in that event also, the maximum punishment prescribed for the alleged offences could be up to 5 years and as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273, and in case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51, the applicant may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable terms and conditions. He further submits that with the help of other persons, present applicant is made a scapegoat. He further submits that arm Page 3 of 16 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Wed Aug 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 00:35:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/11996/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined twisting tactics have been adopted by the partners of the firm with the help of the complainant with a sole intent to harass the present applicant and therefore this is the fit case, wherein, discretionary powers of anticipatory bail may be exercised by this Court.
5. Learned advocate Mr. Pravin Gondaliya appearing for the original complainant has objected present application with vehemence and submitted that in fact complainant is the divorcee lady and mother of two children and for the purpose of her livelihood, regular income is needed. Thereafter, she had come into contact with the accused No.1 through the friend of her brother and at that time accused No.1 herein had given assurance to the complainant that if she will invest money in his business of transportation, in that event, she would earn regular income of Rs.60,000/- per month and for that she need not have to enter into the business premises also. Thus, on the strength of the assurance given by the accused No.1 and other persons, complainant had paid an amount of Rs.22,58,000/- from her savings at periodical intervals and said fact is clearly mentioned in the operative part of the FIR. Thereafter, certain partners have resigned and one of the partners has also registered FIR against the present applicant. He further Page 4 of 16 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Wed Aug 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 00:35:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/11996/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined submits that in fact as per the oral agreement, the said two luxury buses were to be registered in the name of the firm, however, instead of that, those buses have been purchased and registered in the name of the applicant and not only that those buses were plying on the road and they were earning income from that business and despite the said fact accused No.1 has not paid a single penny to the complainant as well as other persons. Therefore complainant has time and again demanded the money from accused No.1 and other persons and she has come to know that whatever amount given by the complainant has been siphoned away by the accused persons and the buses were transferred in the name of the applicant and custody of the buses in question is lying with them and they are earning profits by plying the said vehicles. Therefore, the act, conduct and behaviour of the present applicant clearly goes on to show that with a sole intent to dupe the complainant, the buses were transferred in the name of the applicant, due to which, the complainant has sustained huge monetary loss. Therefore, the basic, essential and requisite ingredients to constitute the offence of criminal breach of trust are clearly made out against the accused persons and therefore the discretionary powers of anticipatory bail may not be exercised in favour Page 5 of 16 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Wed Aug 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 00:35:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/11996/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined of the applicant.
6. Learned APP Mr. Niraj Sharma for the respondent
- State has objected present application with vehemence and submitted that a well designed and systematic plan is organized by the accused persons. The accused No.1 is the main accused, who has duped almost all the persons. He further submits that in fact as per the case of the complainant, total 22,58,000/- have been given by the complainant to different persons for the purpose of purchasing two buses. All those amounts have been collectively transferred to a third party from whom they have purchased the luxury buses. He further submits that in fact initially there were three partners in the said firm and thereafter one partner has resigned. In fact, it is the specific case of the prosecution that one of the partners who had resigned from the said firm had already transferred the money given by the complainant to the prospective seller of the luxury buses by way of courier and receipt to that effect is also produced on record. Therefore, on the basis of the materials collected by the investigating officer, it is found out that so far as other persons are concerned, no specific role could be said to have been made out against them. He further submits that in fact one of the partners has also submitted an application before the Police Page 6 of 16 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Wed Aug 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 00:35:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/11996/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined Commissioner, Surat City before the registration of the present FIR, wherein, he has raised certain allegations against the applicant, pursuant to which, investigation commenced and ultimately at the end of the day, the investigating officer concerned has registered the FIR against the accused persons. The copy of the said FIR is also placed on record. He submits that if the Court would go through the contents of the said FIR, in that event, the entire picture would be crystallized. There is mens rea on the part of the accused persons and said fact is clearly found out from the materials collected by the investigating officer. Thus, considering the aforesaid totality of the facts, applicant may not be enlarged on bail.
7. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and perusing the investigation papers, it is equally incumbent upon the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously, cautiously and strictly in compliance with the basic principles laid down in a plethora of decisions of the Hon'ble 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 applicants including the fact as to whether he Page 7 of 16 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Wed Aug 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 00:35:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/11996/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence; (iii) the possibility of the applicants to flee from justice; and (iv) where the accusation has been made with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicants by having him so arrested. Though at the stage of granting bail an elaborate examination of evidence and detailed reasons touching the merit of the case, which may prejudice the accused, should be avoided. I have considered the following aspects.
8. It is required to be noted that normal procedure prescribed for curtailing the right to life & liberty, is that the investigating officer can arrest the accused even without warrant. No doubt this Court has extraordinary power to protect an innocent person. However, this power has to be exercised by the Courts with due circumspection.
9. It is well settled that an application preferred for anticipatory bail is an exceptional remedy to be granted in exceptional cases. The parameters and considerations governing the grant of anticipatory bail have been explained by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in number of cases. At this stage, I would like to refer and rely upon the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of (i) State Rep. by the CBI V/s Anil Sharma reported in 1997 (7) SCC 187, (ii) Adri Dharan Das V/s State of W.B. reported in 2005 (4) SCC 303
(iii) P. Chidambaram V/s Directorate of Page 8 of 16 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Wed Aug 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 00:35:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/11996/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined Enforcement reported in AIR 2019 SC 4198, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under:
"The legislative intent behind the introduction of Section 438 CrPC is to safeguard the individual's personal liberty and to protect him from the possibility of being humiliated and from being subjected to unnecessary police custody. However, the court must also keep in view that a criminal offence is not just an offence against an individual rather the larger societal interest is at stake. Therefore, a delicate balance is required to be established between the two rights - safeguarding the personal liberty of an individual and the societal interest.
Ordinarily, arrest is a part of procedure of the investigation to secure not only the presence of the accused but several other purposes. There may be circumstances in which the accused may provide information leading to discovery of material facts and relevant information. Grant of anticipatory bail may hamper the investigation. It may frustrate the investigating agency in interrogating the accused and in collecting the useful information and also materials which might have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the accused knows that he is protected by the order of the court. Grant of anticipatory bail, particularly in economic offences would definitely hamper the effective investigation. Pre-arrest bail is to strike a balance between the individual's right to personal freedom and the right of the investigating agency to interrogate the accused as to the material so far collected and to collect more information which may lead to recovery of relevant information. In this view, it cannot be said that refusal to grant anticipatory bail would amount to denial of the rights conferred upon the applicant under Page 9 of 16 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Wed Aug 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 00:35:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/11996/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Consequently, power under Section 438 CrPC being an extraordinary remedy, has to be exercised sparingly; more so, in cases of economic offences. Economic offences stand as a different class as they affect the economic fabric of the society. The privilege of the pre-arrest bail should be granted only in exceptional cases. The judicial discretion conferred upon the court has to be properly exercised after application of mind as to the nature and gravity of the accusation; possibility of the applicant fleeing justice and other factors to decide whether it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Grant of anticipatory bail to some extent interferes in the sphere of investigation of an offence and hence, the court must be circumspect while exercising such power for grant of anticipatory bail. Section 438 CrPC is to be invoked only in exceptional cases where the case alleged is frivolous or groundless. Anticipatory bail is to be granted as a matter of rule and it has to be granted only when the court is convinced that exceptional circumstances exist to resort to that extraordinary remedy".
Having regard to nature of allegations and stage of investigations, held investigating agency must be given sufficient freedom in process of investigation. Appellant not entitled to anticipatory bail as the same would hamper the investigation".
10. In case of Pratibha Manchanda and another Vs. State of Haryana and another reported in (2023) 8 SCC 181, the Hon'ble Apex Court in Paragraph No.21, observed as under:-
"21. The relief of anticipatory bail is aimed at safeguarding individual rights. While it Page 10 of 16 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Wed Aug 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 00:35:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/11996/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined serves as a crucial tool to prevent the misuse of the power of arrest and protects innocent individuals from harassment, it also presents challenges in maintaining a delicate balance between individual rights and the interests of justice. The tight rope we must walk lies in striking a balance between safeguarding individual rights and protecting public interest. While the right to liberty and presumption of innocence are vital, the court must also consider the gravity of the offence, the impact on society, and the need for a fair and free investigation. The court's discretion in weighing these interests in the facts and circumstances of each individual case becomes crucial to ensure a just outcome."
11. At this stage, it is required to be noted that as this application has been preferred under the provisions of Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail, I would like to refer the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors, reported in (2011) 1 SCC 694, more particularly Paragraph Nos.14 & 112, which read as under :-
"14. It is clear from the Statement of Objects and Reasons that the purpose of incorporating Section 438 in the Cr.P.C. was to recognize the importance of personal liberty and freedom in a free and democratic country. When we carefully analyze this section, the wisdom of the legislature becomes quite evident and clear that the legislature was keen to ensure respect for the personal liberty and also pressed in service the age-old principle that an individual is presumed to be innocent till he is found guilty by the court.Page 11 of 16 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Wed Aug 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 00:35:26 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/11996/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined
112. The following factors and parameters can be taken into consideration while dealing with the anticipatory bail: The nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the accused must be properly comprehended before arrest is made; the antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether the accused has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence; The possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; The possibility of the accused's likelihood to repeat similar or the other offences. Whereas the accusation have been made only with the object to injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting him or her. Impact of grant of anticipatory bail particularly in cases of large magnitude affecting a very large number of people. The courts must evaluate the entire available material against the accused very carefully. The court must also clearly comprehend the exact role of the accused in the case."
12. Now, coming back to the facts of the case, it is the specific case of the complainant that she had given Rs.22,58,000/- to the accused No.1 and other persons for the purpose of purchasing two luxury buses under the assurance and pretext of earning regular monthly income through the said business. The complainant has clearly mentioned the name of the persons to whom the money was given and also the date on which the said money was given in cash as well as through G-pay. The receipts of online payment made by the complainant are also produced on record. I have also gone through the contents of the FIR registered by one of the erstwhile partners of Page 12 of 16 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Wed Aug 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 00:35:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/11996/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined the firm of the applicant, wherein, a specific reference of payment of Rs.22,58,000/- by the present complainant as well as transferring the buses in the name of the applicant is clearly made. It is the specific case of the complainant that at the time of receiving the money from the complainant, a wrong assurance was given by the accused No.1 that she will get regular monthly income of Rs.60,000/- from the said business. However, as the complainant has not received a single penny, she has time and again demanded the said money from the accused persons but under one or other pretext, the said amount has not been repaid and thereby the accused persons have committed the offence of criminal breach of trust. I have also considered the statements of various witnesses. I have also gone through the contents of the FIR as well as other materials relied on and referred by the learned APP as well as learned advocate Mr. Gondaliya for the original complainant during the course of hearing of this application which prima facie suggest involvement of the applicant in the commission of crime. Therefore, considering the facts of the present case as also the fact that investigation is still going on, the present application deserves to be rejected.
13. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumitha Pradeep Vs. Arun Kumar C.K. & Anr., reported in Page 13 of 16 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Wed Aug 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 00:35:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/11996/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1529 held that merely because custodial interrogation is not required, by itself, could not be a ground to grant anticipatory bail. The first and the foremost thing the Court, while hearing the anticipatory bail application, has to consider is the prima facie case against the accused. The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"It may be true, as pointed out by learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1, that charge-sheet has already been filed. It will be unfair to presume on our part that the Investigating Officer does not require Respondent No.1 for custodial interrogation for the purpose of further investigation. Be that as it may, even assuming it a case where Respondent No.1 is not required for custodial interrogation, we are satisfied that the High Court ought not to have granted discretionary relief of anticipatory bail. We are dealing with a matter wherein the original complainant (appellant herein) has come before this Court praying that the anticipatory bail granted by the High Court to the accused should be cancelled. To put it in other words, the complainant says that the High Court wrongly exercised its discretion while granting anticipatory bail to the accused in a very serious crime like POCSO and, therefore, the order passed by the High Court granting anticipatory bail to the accused should be quashed and set aside. In many anticipatory bail matters, we have noticed one common argument being canvassed that no custodial interrogation is required and, therefore, anticipatory bail may be granted. There appears to be a serious misconception of law that if no case for custodial interrogation is made out by the prosecution, then that alone would be a good ground to grant anticipatory bail.Page 14 of 16 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Wed Aug 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 00:35:26 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/11996/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined Custodial interrogation can be one of the relevant aspects to be considered along with other grounds while deciding an application seeking anticipatory bail. There may be many cases in which the custodial interrogation of the accused may not be required, but that does not mean that the prima facie case against the accused should be ignored or overlooked and he should be granted anticipatory bail. The first and foremost thing that the court hearing an anticipatory bail application should consider is the prima facie case put up against the accused. Thereafter, the nature of the offence should be looked into along with the severity of the punishment. Custodial interrogation can be one of the grounds to decline custodial interrogation. However, even if custodial interrogation is not required or necessitated, by itself, cannot be a ground to grant anticipatory bail."
14. Thus, while taking into consideration the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre (supra) as also ratio laid down in other decisions as stated above, I have gone through the contents of the FIR, which is placed on record and also considered the affidavit of the investigating officer filed before the learned Judge concerned opposing the bail application preferred by the applicant. Upon going through the contents of the FIR, it appears that prima facie case is made out against the applicant and material collected so far suggests involvement of the applicant in the commission of crime.
15. For the foregoing reasons, having regard to the facts and circumstances, peculiar to the instant Page 15 of 16 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Wed Aug 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 00:35:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/11996/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined case, as have been analyzed hereinabove, the applicant has failed to make out a special case for exercise of power to grant anticipatory bail and considering the facts and parameters, necessary to be considered for adjudication of anticipatory bail, this Court does not find any exceptional ground to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the BNSS to grant anticipatory bail. More so, investigation is still going on in the present case. It is settled proposition of law that power exercisable under Section 482 BNSS, is somewhat discretionary in character and it is to be exercised with caution in exceptional cases.
16. Hence, the present application seeking anticipatory bail, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed. Notice is discharged.
17. Needless to say that the observations and findings made hereinabove are limited to the decision of this pre-arrest bail application, and shall not influence in any other proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR.
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J) LAVKUMAR J JANI Page 16 of 16 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Wed Aug 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 00:35:26 IST 2025