Gujarat High Court
Saurabhbhai Kailashbhai Jain vs State Of Gujarat on 18 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025
undefined
Reserved On : 14/07/2025
Pronounced On : 18/07/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO.
7175 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
SAURABHBHAI KAILASHBHAI JAIN
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ND NANAVATI, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR DIPEN K
DAVE(3296) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
DHRUV TOLIYA(9249) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK SONI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
CAV JUDGMENT
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. Page 1 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined No.11191010250113 of 2025 registered with the Madhavpura Police Station, Ahmedabad City for the alleged offences as mentioned in the FIR.
3. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. N. D. Nanavati assisted by learned advocate Mr. Dipen K. Dave for the applicant, learned APP Mr. Hardik Soni for respondent No.1 - State and learned advocate Mr. Dhruv Tolia for the original complainant.
4. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. N. D. Nanavati assisted by learned advocate Mr. Dipen Dave for the applicant submits that the so-called incident is occurred during the period between 01.10.2021 to 09.11.2023, whereas, FIR is registered on 12.03.2025. Thus, there is gross delay in registering the FIR. He further submits that complainant and present applicant both are close relatives and at earlier point of time they were business partners. He further submits that it is the specific case of the prosecution that a motorbike of the complainant was lying in the office of the applicant and said motorbike had been sold to a third party without informing the complainant and even the name of the owner of the vehicle is also changed in the RTO record by way of filling TTO form. He further submits that it is the specific case of the complainant that he has not signed the said form and somebody else has made his signature upon the said form, and thereafter, without informing the Page 2 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined complainant, the said vehicle has been sold out by the applicant to a third party and pocketed the price of the said vehicle and thereby applicant has committed the offence of cheating. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Nanavati submits that in fact during the pendency of the present proceedings, applicant herein has tried his level best to settle the dispute with the complainant, but for the reasons best known to him, he has not settled the dispute with the applicant. He further submits that the only allegation levelled against the applicant is that the vehicle of the complainant is sold out by the applicant without informing him. He further submits that without prejudice to his rights and contentions, the applicant is ready and willing to purchase new motorbike of the choice of the complainant in his name. He further submits that in fact certain other disputes are going on between both the parties and the applicant has tried his level best to settle those disputes with the complainant but the complainant has demanded exorbitant amount to settle those disputes. Thus, considering the aforesaid overall facts of the present case and gravity of the offence, applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail by imposing suitable terms and conditions.
5. Learned APP Mr. Hardik Soni appearing for the Page 3 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined respondent - State has strongly objected present application and submitted that in fact complainant and applicant are close relatives and disputes have been cropped up between them and without informing the complainant, his vehicle has been sold out by the applicant. Thus, considering the aforesaid factual aspects, the Court may pass an appropriate order.
6. Learned advocate Mr. Dhruv Tolia appearing for the original complainant has objected present application with vehemence and submitted that involvement of the present applicant in the commission of crime is clearly found out. He further submits that he need not have to enter into the disputed questions of fact about the issue of settlement between the parties as there are number of issues interconnected with each other and it is practically not viable on his part to disclose the said facts in the instant matter. He submits that so far as accusation and allegation levelled against the applicant is concerned, initially, one FIR has been registered by the father of the complainant against the applicant and his father as one INNOVA Car of the ownership of the father of the complainant, which was given to the father of the applicant for the business purpose, had been sold out by the applicant and his father without informing the father of the complainant and Page 4 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined therefore at that relevant point of time, FIR has been registered. He further submits that thereafter the dispute has been amicably settled between both the parties. Now, after lapse of some time, when the complainant had demanded the custody of the vehicle of the ownership of the complainant from the applicant, he has flatly refused to give the custody of the said vehicle. Thereafter, complainant has come to know that the said vehicle has been sold by the applicant to the third party and ownership of the said vehicle has also been transferred by filling TTO form by forging his signature. Therefore, complainant herein has made an application to the concerned police authority, specifically stating that there are all possible chances that the said vehicle would be used for criminal activities by transferring the ownership of the vehicle. However, for the reasons best known to the concerned Police Authority, they had not taken any action. He further submits that in fact the person who had purchased the said vehicle is permanent resident of Panchmahal District and complainant had not paid any visit to Panchmahal District at the relevant time when the ownership of the vehicle was transferred, which clearly goes on to show that a false and fabricated document has been created by the applicant and placed before the RTO authority Page 5 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined and on the strength of the said material, vehicle was transferred and handed over to the concerned person. He further submits that complainant has also preferred an application before the Madhavpura Police Station but reasons best known to the concerned police officers, they had closed the said inquiry by assigning the reason that one of the persons has declared the fact on stamp paper of Rs.300/- that the said vehicle had been sold away by the original complainant in favour of proposed purchaser in his presence. The executor of the said document happens to be the employee of the father of the present applicant and at that relevant of time before closing the said inquiry, the statement of the complainant has not been recorded by the police authority. Therefore, aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said action, complainant has preferred one petition before this Court, wherein, specific direction was issued to the learned Court concerned not to give due weightage to the reasons assigned by the police authority, at the time of passing the order. Thereafter, the complainant has approached before the learned Court concerned by way of preferring an application in the form of complaint and after considering and appreciating the accusations and allegations levelled against the applicant, the learned Court concerned has Page 6 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined passed an order under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and on the basis of which FIR has been registered. Thus, the aforesaid totality of the facts clearly goes on to show that with a sole intent to defraud the complainant, a false and fabricated document has been created and valuable vehicle of the ownership of the complainant has been sold and transferred in the name of third party and pocketed huge amount by the applicant without the knowledge of the complainant. Thus, considering the aforesaid factual aspects, involvement of the applicant in the commission of crime is clearly found out and therefore he 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 has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence; (iii) the possibility of the applicants Page 7 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined 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 Enforcement reported in AIR 2019 SC 4198, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under:
Page 8 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined "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 Page 9 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined 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 appellant/ applicant under 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 Page 10 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined 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 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."Page 11 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined
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.
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 Page 12 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined 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 his valuable vehicle has been sold out by the applicant without his knowledge by forging his signature and creating bogus documents. It is also the case of the complainant that earlier also one FIR has been registered against the applicant and his father by the father of the complainant for selling his INNOVA Car without his knowledge. However, the said dispute has been settled amicably. Thereafter, once again, applicant has sold out the motorbike of the ownership of the complainant without his knowledge by forging his signature and creating bogus documents. As soon as complainant came to know about the said fact, he preferred an application in the form of complaint before the Page 13 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined police authority, but the said inquiry has been closed by the police by assigning reason that one person has disclosed the fact on a stamp paper of Rs.300/- regarding selling of the vehicle in question by the complainant in his presence. It is the case of the complainant that the executor of the said document is an employee of the father of the applicant. Therefore, complainant preferred petition before this Court, wherein, the Court concerned has directed the learned Trial Court not to give due weightage to the reason assigned by the police authority for not registering the FIR. Thereafter, after appreciating and considering the allegations and accusations levelled against the applicant, learned Court concerned passed order under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and based on that, FIR has been registered against the applicant. I have also gone through the contents of the FIR as well as other materials relied upon and referred by the learned APP 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 going on, the present application deserves to be rejected.
13. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumitha Page 14 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined Pradeep Vs. Arun Kumar C.K. & Anr., reported in 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 Page 15 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined 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. 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 Page 16 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined 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 applicants. 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 the 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 case, as have been analyzed hereinabove, the applicants have 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 Page 17 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7175/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined 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 18 of 18 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 19 00:21:18 IST 2025