Gujarat High Court
Jayeshkumar Chunilal Gamit vs State Of Gujarat on 14 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/21349/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO.
21349 of 2025
==========================================================
JAYESHKUMAR CHUNILAL GAMIT
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
JAYDEEP H SINDHI(9585) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR NITIN S PRADHAN(11153) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK SONI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
Date : 14/10/2025
ORAL 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.11824001251620 of 2025 registered with Vyara Police Station, District Tapi for the alleged offences as mentioned in the FIR.
3. Learned advocate Mr. Jaydeep Sindhi appearing for the applicant submits that as per the case of the prosecution, the so-called incident is occurred during the period between 01.01.2021_ Page 1 of 9 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:58:50 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/21349/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined to 31.07.2025, whereas, FIR is registered on 08.08.2025 against total two persons, wherein, name of the applicant is mentioned at serial No.2. He submits that there is gross delay in registering the FIR and investigating agency has failed to explain the cause for such delayed registration of the FIR. He further submits that if the Hon'ble Court would make cursory glance upon the contents of the FIR, in that event, it would have been found out that applicant is not at all directly and/or indirectly connected and/or associated with the commission of crime. He further submits that in fact it is the accused No.1 who was in contact with the complainant and others and there is call recording between them and based upon which applicant has been arraigned as an accused. He further submits that applicant has not demanded any money from the complainant. He further submits that the prosecuting agency is behind the applicant and therefore within a period of 12 days only, three different FIRs have been registered against the applicant. He further submits that in one of the FIRs, he has been protected by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, whereas, in another FIR, he is not named in the FIR. He further submits that applicant is a journalist by profession and he used to unearth the illegal activities carried out by the Page 2 of 9 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:58:50 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/21349/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined Government functionaries and he was working as a whistleblower and due to the publications of news articles by the applicant, four officers of concerned Taluka Panchayat have been suspended. Those documents are already appended with the memo of the application. He submits that as a counter blast, present false and fabricated FIR has been registered against the applicant for the purpose of controlling or stifling the free flow of information. Thus, considering the aforesaid overall facts of the present case, applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail by imposing suitable condition
4. On the other hand, learned APP Mr. Hardik Soni for the respondent - State has objected this application with vehemence and submitted that the accused persons have demanded an amount of Rs.5 lakh from the complainant to stop publishing adverse news about his Government contracts under Pradhan Mantri Adi Adarsh Gram Vikas Yojana. Thus, accused have misused their powers and tried to exert the pressure upon the innocent persons with a sole intent to get undue monetary benefits under the guise of publishing adverse news against them and therefore total three FIRs have been registered against the applicant. He further submits that in fact during the course of investigation, the investigating officer concerned has collected Page 3 of 9 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:58:50 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/21349/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined certain important documents, which ultimately lead towards the guilt of the present applicant. He further submits that if the Hon'ble Court would make cursory glance upon the contents of the FIR, in that event, it would have been found that from the very inception name as well as specific role of the applicant is clearly mentioned by the complainant. Not only that, during the course of investigation, investigating officer has collected the audio recording which had taken place between the co- accused and complainant, wherein a reference as regards the name as well as money demanded at the instance of present applicant is clearly mentioned by the co-accused. He further submits that the said recording is already forwarded to the FSL and report from the FSL is yet not received. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the transcript of the said conversation (recording) and submitted that in the said conversation which has taken place between the co-accused and complainant, name as well as money demanded at the instance of the applicant is clearly mentioned. Thus, prima facie involvement of the applicant in the commission of crime is clearly found out. He, therefore, submits that this is not a fit case, wherein, discretionary powers of anticipatory bail can be exercised.
Page 4 of 9 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:58:50 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/21349/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined
5. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for both the parties and having gone through the materials placed on record, it is found out that it is alleged by the complainant that accused persons have demanded an amount of Rs.5 lakh from the complainant to stop publishing adverse news about his Government contracts under Pradhan Mantri Adi Adarsh Gram Vikas Yojana. Therefore, FIR has been registered against the accused persons. It is also found out from the record that during the course of investigation, the investigating officer concerned has collected certain documents in support of the contents of the FIR which includes the audio recording which has taken place between the co- accused and complainant, wherein a specific reference as regards the name as well as money demanded at the instance of present applicant is clearly mentioned by the co-accused. I have also considered the contents of the conversation took place between them. Thus, in the opinion of this Court, prima facie involvement of the applicant in the commission of crime is clearly found out. It is pertinent to note that applicant is a journalist by profession and prima facie it seems that accused persons have misused their powers and tried to exert the pressure upon the complainant and others with a sole intention to get undue monetary benefits under the guise of Page 5 of 9 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:58:50 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/21349/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined publishing adverse news against them and therefore total three FIRs have been registered against the applicant. The investigation is going on.
6. I have also perused the contents of the FIR, affidavit filed by the IO at the time of objecting anticipatory bail application of the applicant before the learned Trial Court, the reasoning assigned by the learned Trial Court at the time of rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the applicant as well as other corroborative materials in the form of statements of the witnesses and considering the said materials, I am of the opinion that, prima facie, the applicant is involved in the commission of crime. Though at the stage of deciding bail, an elaborate examination of evidence and detailed reasons touching the merit of the case, which may prejudice the accused, should be avoided. Therefore, at this stage, without discussing the evidence in detail, I restrict myself to the extent of giving the opinion of prima facie involvement of the applicant in the commission of crime.
7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumitha 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 Page 6 of 9 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:58:50 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/21349/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined 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 Page 7 of 9 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:58:50 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/21349/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined 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."
8. For the foregoing reasons, having regard to the facts and circumstances, peculiar to the instant 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 Page 8 of 9 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:58:50 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/21349/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined exercisable under Section 482 BNSS, is somewhat discretionary in character and it is to be exercised with caution in exceptional cases.
9. Hence, the present application seeking anticipatory bail, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed. Rule is discharged.
10. 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 9 of 9 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:58:50 IST 2025