Gujarat High Court
Ashokji Badaji Thakor vs State Of Gujarat on 9 May, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/9698/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/05/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO.
9698 of 2025
==========================================================
ASHOKJI BADAJI THAKOR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.DARSHAN A. DAVE(7921) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR H K PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 09/05/2025
ORAL ORDER
"BE YOU EVER SO HIGH, THE LAW OF ALWAYS ABOVE YOU"
(1) Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent-State.
(2) By way of present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant has prayed to grant him anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR registered at Vadali Police Station, Dist. Sabarkantha, being C.R No. 11209054250171 of 2025 for the offences under Section 109 of BNS and under the provisions of the Gujarat Prohibition Act.
(3) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely roped in the offence. There is no direct or indirect evidence to establish the connection of the applicant with the alleged offence. He is not named in the FIR. Merely based on the statement of the co-accused and applicant having several past antecedents, he has been arraigned as an accused. No any recovery or discovery is made from the applicant. He has also submitted Page 1 of 12 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Fri May 09 2025 Downloaded on : Sat May 10 20:56:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9698/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/05/2025 undefined that, alleged liquor was not found from conscious possession of the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that allegation against the applicant is that, he was piloting Innova car bearing RTO registration No.GJ-02-0845 carrying contraband liquor and is not the owner of the car. No CCTV footage is collected which suggests the involvement of the applicant or car of the applicant. Muddamal has already been recovered and therefore, now nothing is required to be recovered from the applicant. It is also submitted that he has nothing to do with Innova car and owner of the car is not arraigned as an accused. Police has tried to frame the applicant keeping the grudge with official of State Monitoring Cell. In this regard, father of the applicant has submitted one representation dated 01.05.2025 before various authorities including Home Minister, Commissioner of Police, ACB etc. and made allegation against PSI Mr.Shaikh and requested to do thorough investigation of the offence. He further submitted that the nature of allegations are such for which custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. Besides, the applicant is available during the course of investigation and will not flee from justice. In view of the above, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.
(4) On the contrary, the learned APP has vehemently opposed the bail application, submitting that the applicant is involved in the offence. The applicant has several criminal antecedents and is a habitual offender. Although he is not named in the FIR, his name surfaced during the investigation. He has failed to join the investigation and is currently on the run. The APP further highlighted that the applicant is the mastermind of the offence from the outset. The applicant's brother's Innova car was used in the transportation of the contraband liquor, and the applicant had Page 2 of 12 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Fri May 09 2025 Downloaded on : Sat May 10 20:56:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9698/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/05/2025 undefined direct control over it. The applicant had also modified the vehicle by installing a guard made of iron angles and instructed the driver to run over or harm the police if the vehicle was intercepted during transportation. This would ensure a safe passage for the contraband. The applicant was piloting the Innova car, which was later found to be carrying contraband. It was also submitted that, based on specific intelligence, when the complainant and ASI Narsinhbhai tried to intercept the Innova car, the driver ran over them, causing injuries. The police officials were informed, and the accused fled through an interior road. Subsequently, when the vehicle was headed towards the border area of Mehsana-
Sabarkantha Districts, Vadali Police, who were on patrol during the Ramnavami Festival, attempted to block the road. Once again, the driver of the Innova ran over the police officials and escaped through an interior road. The vehicle was later intercepted on the road, where accused Nos. 3 and 6 managed to escape, while accused Nos. 1 and 2 were caught red-handed with 992 bottles of contraband liquor valued at Rs. 2,02,165/-. The car and mobiles were also seized. Considering the applicant's involvement, particularly as the Innova car belongs to the applicant's brother, and given that the investigation is ongoing with an offence registered by the Vadali Police Station, the State Monitoring Cell has no reason to hold any grudge. The applicant is not only facing charges under the Prohibition Act but is also charged under Section 109 of the BNS Act, and an attempt to commit murder has been lodged against him. In light of these facts, the learned APP requested that the present bail application be dismissed.
(5) This Court has considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for both the sides and considered the material placed on record.
Page 3 of 12 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Fri May 09 2025 Downloaded on : Sat May 10 20:56:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9698/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/05/2025 undefined
(6) The facts of the prosecution case are that, based on specific intelligence, when ASI Narsinhbhai attempted to intercept the Innova car, the driver of the car deliberately ran over him, causing injuries. ASI Narsinhbhai immediately informed his officials, following which the police pursued the vehicle. The accused took the car through an interior road. The police officials then alerted the police control and Himmatnagar police. At the time, when the vehicle was nearing the border of Mehsana and Sabarkantha Districts, Vadali Police, who were on patrol during the Ramnavami Festival, also attempted to chase and block the road to catch the vehicle. However, once again, the driver of the Innova car ran over the police officials and fled through an interior road. The vehicle was subsequently intercepted, and at that point, accused Nos. 3 and 6 managed to escape from the scene, while accused Nos. 1 and 2 were caught red-handed with conscious possession of 992 bottles of contraband liquor valued at Rs. 2,02,165/-. Along with the liquor, the car and mobiles were also seized. An FIR was subsequently filed in this regard.
(7) The criteria to grant anticipatory bail and regular bail has been laid down by the Apex Court in various decisions. While criminal administration of justice disturbed, arrest is a part of investigation. After the arrest of the accused when substantial part of the investigation including remand gets over, then the Court has to exercise jurisdiction considering the evidence collected during investigation. It is needless to say that Section 482 of the BNSS is pre-arrest bail as there is a part of investigation and importance of the arrest is time and again discussed by the Hon'ble Apex Court. When the involvement of the accused is prima facie revealed and if allegation is not levelled that to defame him or to tarnish his Page 4 of 12 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Fri May 09 2025 Downloaded on : Sat May 10 20:56:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9698/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/05/2025 undefined image, the Court has to exercise jurisdiction, but to seek anticipatory bail is not an extraordinary jurisdiction and absolute right of the accused.
(8) In the present case, and based on the material placed on record, it is clear that, as per the secret information received, and acting on specific intelligence, when ASI Narsinhbhai attempted to intercept the Innova car, the driver deliberately ran over the officer, causing injuries. ASI Narsinhbhai immediately informed his officials, after which the police pursued the vehicle. The accused took the car through an interior road. The police officials then alerted the police control and Himmatnagar police. When the vehicle was approaching the border between Mehsana and Sabarkantha Districts, Vadali Police, who were on patrol during the Ramnavami Festival, also attempted to chase and block the vehicle. However, once again, the driver of the Innova ran over the police officials and fled the scene via an interior road. The vehicle was later intercepted in Sabarkantha District, and at that point, accused Nos. 3 and 6 escaped, while accused Nos. 1 and 2 were caught red- handed with conscious possession of 992 bottles of contraband liquor, valued at Rs. 2,02,165/-. Along with the contraband, the car and mobiles were also seized. Based on the statement of co- accused Paresh Kanaji Thakore, who is cousin brother of the applicant and was accompanied in Innova car, applicant's name is revealed. In the statement of said witness, he has no axe to grind. Furthermore, knowing that Gujarat is a dry state, the applicant transported the contraband with the intent to sell it. As and when the applicant released on bail, misused his liberty and having 14 similar antecedents of similar nature in different police stations of the Gujarat State.
Page 5 of 12 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Fri May 09 2025 Downloaded on : Sat May 10 20:56:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9698/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/05/2025 undefined
(9) In this background facts, this Court prima facie is of considered view that, there is a reasonable ground to believe that the applicant has committed the alleged offence. Considering the facts of the present case, it cannot be said that the applicant herein has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. If the anticipatory bail as sought for is granted, then it will affect the investigation of the case.
(10) Furthermore, the contraband liquor was loaded and transported in the Innova car, which belonged to the applicant's brother, and the applicant was piloting the car. This clearly indicates the applicant's knowledge and intent regarding the contraband. In the course of the offence, two police personnel sustained injuries, and the accused made attempts to run them over twice, all in a bid to continue his illegal activities. The applicant is the mastermind, and at his instance contraband was transported. He attempted to give a safe passage by piloting the Innova car. As for the contention raised by the learned counsel for the applicant, regarding the fact that the applicant is not visible in the CCTV footage, it is important to note that, while the police were chasing the Innova car, the accused diverted the vehicle into an interior road and fled the scene. Therefore, it was not possible to capture the applicant in the CCTV footage. Further, the counsel's argument that the State Monitoring Cell did not conduct any raid is irrelevant, as the entire offence was conducted and registered by Vadali Police Station. Regarding the representation made by the applicant's father, it appears that the applicant is the mastermind and has taken advantage of leeway. After the FIR was registered on 06.04.2025, i.e., 25 days after the incident, the father of the applicant addressed a representation to various authorities through RPAD, which clearly indicates that the applicant had a trained mind. From Page 6 of 12 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Fri May 09 2025 Downloaded on : Sat May 10 20:56:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9698/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/05/2025 undefined 2015 to 2025, several offences have been registered against the applicant at various police stations, including Vadali, Vijaynagar, Gandhinagar, Vadnagar, Idar, Gambhoi, and Khedbrahma. This pattern of repeated criminal activity indicates the applicant's habitual involvement in such illegal activities. The contention of the learned counsel that the applicant's cousin, the owner of the Innova car, has not been named as an accused does not serve as ground to allow the present application. The FIR is not an encyclopedia, and the investigation is still in its initial stages. Hence, prima facie, an offence under Section 109 of the BNS Act is made out. During the investigation, it was revealed that the applicant is indeed involved in the offence and has numerous past criminal antecedents of a similar nature in various police stations across Gujarat.
(11) So far the second limb of argument with respect to applicant is not found in conscious possession of the liquor is concerned, reference is required to be made upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Md. Nawaz Khan, reported in (2021) 10 SCC 100, wherein, the Apex Court has held that "in absence of possession of the contraband on the person of the accused does not absolve it of the level of scrutiny required under the Act. The Hon'ble Apex Court further has been pleased to hold that, the term possession could mean physical possession with animus, custody over the prohibited substances with animus, exercise of dominion and control as a result of concealment or personal knowledge as to the existence of the contraband and the intention based on such knowledge. Further, from whom the contraband liquor has received and to whom he has to deliver is also required to be investigated and for that also, custodial interrogation is required.
Page 7 of 12 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Fri May 09 2025 Downloaded on : Sat May 10 20:56:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9698/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/05/2025 undefined (12) Insofar as the submission on behalf of the applicant that in the
present case, muddamal is already recovered and therefore, no custodial interrogation is required is concerned, it is worth to mention that herein, prima facie case is made out against the present applicant and there are serious allegations against the applicant that he is the master mind of the offence and under his supervision, contraband liquor was transported and he was piloting the vehicle carrying contraband liquor. Further, the applicant is having several antecedents of similar nature and is habitual offender. Thus, in order to reach to a logical conclusion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer deserves a free hand. There is no rule that if custodial interrogation is not required then anticipatory bail is required to be granted. The custodial interrogation is one of the good grounds to reject the anticipatory bail application but merely because custodial interrogation is not required, itself is not a ground to allow the anticipatory bail application. In this regard, reference is required to be made to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sumitha Pradeep Vs. Arun Kumar C.K. reported in 2022 SCC OnLine (SC) 1529, wherein it is observed and held as follows:
"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."
(13) In so far the statement of co-accused is concerned,it provides clues to the investigating agency as to how to investigate the case and Page 8 of 12 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Fri May 09 2025 Downloaded on : Sat May 10 20:56:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9698/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/05/2025 undefined thereafter the investigating officer has to collect evidence against the person who has been named as the accused. In the light of the above provisions, there is no bar on considering the statement of co-accused for investigation purposes. At this stage, it is relevant to note that this Court has observed in the case of Mohmed Salim abdul Rasid Shaikh v. State of Gujarat, reported in 2001(2) GLR 1580, in para 12, as under:
"...It is pertinent to note that the prosecution case rests mainly on circumstantial evidence and police has received a clue against the present applicant from the statement of co-accused, already arrested. Irrespective of the fact that statement of co-accused to police is not admissible in evidence before the Court, but police can certainly consider that statement as a clue while interrogating him further or other persons arrested or interrogated during the course of investigation..."
(14) The coordinate Bench of this Court in a case of Jigneshkumar Maheshbhai Patel vs State of Gujarat, (Criminal Misc. Application No.3122 of 2018) has observed as under :
"16. The presumption of innocence, by itself, cannot be the sole consideration for grant of bail. The presumption of innocence is one of the considerations, which the court should keep in mind while considering the plea for bail. The salutary rule is to balance the cause of the criminal defendant and the cause of public justice. Over solicitous homage to the criminal defendant's liberty can, sometimes, defeat the cause of public justice. Over a period of time, a feeling seems to exist in some quarters that the object of criminal law is to protect the rights of the accused and that the criminal justicing system is envisioned as a sentinel of the rights of the accused. It is not so. The law is the sentinel of rights of the society and of the individual. The rights of the criminal defendant will be as zealously guarded, as the cause of public justice. Pre-trial detention in itself is not an evil, nor opposed to the basic presumption of innocence. If liberty is to be denied to an accused to ensure maintenance of law and order and public health, then the courts should not hesitate in denying such liberty. Ensuring security and order including public health is a permissible non-punitive objective, which can be achieved by R/CR.MA/3122/2018 JUDGMENT pre-trial detention. Where overwhelming considerations in the nature aforesaid require denial of bail, it has to be denied"
(15) The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jai Prakash Singh Vs State of Bihar & Anr. reported in 2012 4 SCC 379, has been pleased to Page 9 of 12 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Fri May 09 2025 Downloaded on : Sat May 10 20:56:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9698/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/05/2025 undefined hold as under:-
"Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offences are required to be satisfied and further while granting such relief, the court must record the reasons therefore. Anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has falsely been enroped in the crime and would not misuse his liberty."
(16) It is appropriate to refer to the judgment of the Apex Court rendered in case of Pratibha Manchand Vs. State of Haryana, reported in AIR 2023 SC 3307, wherein the Apex Court has observed thus:-
"19. 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."
In view of the above decision and in view of the facts and circumstances of this case, custodial interrogation of not only the applicant, but all other suspect/s is therefore imperative to unearth the truth. Hence, this is a not a fit case to exercise the jurisdiction in favour of the applicant.
(17) Further, Gujarat is a dry State and pursuant to Article 47 of the Constitution of India, the directive principles of the State policy, it is the duty of the State to raise the standard of living and improve the public health and for the said purpose, prohibition of liquor being made compulsory in the Gujarat State. The State is committed to the ideas and principles of Father of Nation Shri Mahatma Gandhji and State also firmly intends to eradicate the menace of consuming liquor or intoxicating drugs to overhaul the law relating to intoxicating drugs and total prohibition in the State Page 10 of 12 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Fri May 09 2025 Downloaded on : Sat May 10 20:56:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9698/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/05/2025 undefined and for that amendments also being made in the Gujarat Prohibition Act. Considering the aforesaid fact, prima facie involvement being made out, no case is made out to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.
(18) Nevertheless, considering the applicant's conduct, it indicates a clear mens rea on his part. Upon perusal of the investigation papers, it appears that his involvement is not solely based on the statement of a co-accused; rather, the investigation has revealed his active involvement. When the involvement of the accused is prima facie revealed and if allegation is not levelled that to defame him or to tarnish his image, the Court has to exercise jurisdiction, but to seek anticipatory bail is not an extraordinary jurisdiction and absolute right of the accused. In this regard, reference is required to be made on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Ram Kishna Balothia, reported in 1995 (3) SCC 221.
(19) Ergo, the applicant is having 14 antecedents of similar nature in different police stations of Gujarat State. As and when the applicant is released on bail, he has misused his liberty and continued in such type of illegal activities. Even not only that, in the instant case, the present applicant is also not abiding citizen. It was the duty of the police to maintain law and order and as a law abiding citizen, he has to respond or support the police agency in maintaining law and order. Rather to maintain the law and order, he has violated the law and law taken in his hand and has threatened the police officials on duty and tried to move down them. For that purpose, prior to transporting contraband liquor in Innova car, he has modified the car fixing guard rear and front side by Iron angle and with specific instruction that if police intercept Page 11 of 12 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Fri May 09 2025 Downloaded on : Sat May 10 20:56:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9698/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/05/2025 undefined the car, in the event, run over them so vehicle safely pass through the route and car may not got damaged which clearly reveals his intention and mensrea and his high handedness. Two police personnel have sustained injuries and offence under Section 109 of BNS is invoked. Injury is irrelevant but intention is required to be considered. Herein mensrea of the applicant is clearly revealed. Nonetheless, after registration of complaint i.e. after 26 days, he has made a representation through his father to the various authorities alleging that he has falsely implicated in the offence and allegations levelled against State Monitoring Cell, but alleged offence registered with local police and investigated conducted by the Local Crime Branch. Hence, SMC has nothing to do with the offence. Said representation is nothing, but an afterthought with a view to create the defense, which is filed afterthought. This Court is of considered view that if the applicant is granted bail, then under the protective umbrella of anticipatory bail, which would adversely affect to unearth the truth and against the larger societal interest of justice. Personal liberty is never for misuse or at the cost of the society. As and when the applicant is released on bail, he continued to indulge similar type of illegal activities and if the application is allowed, which would amount to premium to wrong doer and demoralized law enforcing agency. Accordingly, present application does not deserve any consideration and is hereby dismissed. Rule is discharged.
(20) It is made clear that this Court has not delve into the merits of the matter and the views expressed in the order are prima facie only.
Sd/-
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) SUCHIT Page 12 of 12 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Fri May 09 2025 Downloaded on : Sat May 10 20:56:29 IST 2025