Gujarat High Court
Abdul Azimkhan Nasirkhan Pathan vs State Of Gujarat on 14 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/20772/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
Reserved On 10/10/2025
Pronounced On : 14/10/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 20772 of 2025
(FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL)
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI : Sd/-
=======================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
-- √
=======================================================
ABDUL AZIMKHAN NASIRKHAN PATHAN
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=======================================================
Appearance:
MR ZUBIN BHARDA with MR AA ZABUAWALA with MS TASNIM A
ZABUAWALA(10756) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK SONI APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR DM DEVNANI 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 a (for short "BNSS"), the applicant has prayed for anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11191043250405 of 2025 registered with Shahpur Police Station, Ahmedabad City for the alleged offences as mentioned in the FIR.
3. Heard learned advocate, Mr. Zubin Bharda assisted by learned advocate, Mr. A.A. Zabuawala for the Page 1 of 11 Uploaded by PATIL GAUTAMBHAI GOPALBHAI(HC00190) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:56:33 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/20772/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined applicant, learned APP Mr. Hardik Soni for the respondent - State of Gujarat and learned advocate, Mr. D.M. Devnani for the original complainant.
4. Learned advocate, Mr. Bharda referred to the FIR and submitted that so-called incident has occurred during the period between 21.06.2025 to 09.07.2025, for which, FIR has been lodged on 09.07.2025 against total 4 accused persons, wherein the applicant is shown as accused no.4. He submitted that in fact, there was some dispute going on between two rival parties, which resulted into registration of the present FIR. He submitted that in fact, prior to registration of the present FIR, three FIRs have been registered against the applicant, out of which, the applicant has been granted bail in connection with two FIRs, whereas in connection with one FIR, the applicant has been protected by the Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court in a quashing petition preferred by the applicant. He, therefore, submitted that considering the above facts, it is evident that with a sole intent to frame the applicant in false offence, the present FIR has been lodged with oblique motive.
5. Learned advocate submitted that so far as the allegations and accusations leveled in the FIR are concerned, it is alleged that the the applicant had gone at particular place along with other persons, wherein he administered threats to one Page 2 of 11 Uploaded by PATIL GAUTAMBHAI GOPALBHAI(HC00190) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:56:33 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/20772/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined Farhan, who is cousin brother of the complainant and also demanded certain amount. He, however, submitted that in fact, those allegations and accusation are absolutely incorrect in view of the fact that he was in the hospital and as soon as the complainant came to know about the said fact, they have changed their stand and come with a case that by mistake, incorrect date is mentioned instead of correct date but this is nothing but an attempt to come out from their mistake, which clearly goes on to show that the applicant is wrongly arraigned as accused in the aforesaid offence. He submitted that in fact, in the third FIR lodged against, the applicant has also been wrongly arraigned, against which, quashing petition has been preferred by the applicant before this Hon'ble Court being Special Criminal Application No.10981/2025 and considering the submissions canvassed on behalf of learned advocate for the applicant, the Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court admitted the matter and granted stay against further investigation, copy of said order is produced on record at Page No.51 of the compilation. He further submitted that in the said FIR also, the complainant concerned had subsequently come with a case that by mistake, incorrect date of offence is mentioned. He, therefore, submitted that from the facts narrated hereinabove, it transpires that anyhow the complainant wants to harass the applicant under Page 3 of 11 Uploaded by PATIL GAUTAMBHAI GOPALBHAI(HC00190) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:56:33 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/20772/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined the guise of registration of FIR.
6. Learned advocate submitted that in fact, the reason behind registration of the aforesaid FIR is that earlier the applicant and his neighbour were beaten by the persons of the builder, therefore, FIR has been lodged by the applicant against those accused persons and subsequently, those accused had preferred quashing petition before this Hon'ble Court on the ground of settlement, however as soon as the applicant came to know about the said fact, he appeared before this Hon'ble Court and raised his objection about the grant of such quashing petition and considering the objection raised by the applicant, the Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court had partly allowed the said quashing petition, whereby the said quashing petition was allowed qua the said applicant nos.2 and 3, wherein it was rejected as not pressed qua the said applicant nos.1 and 4, therefore keeping grudge about the said fact, the present FIR has been lodged wrongly implicating the applicant absolute false and frivolous FIR.
7. Learned advocate referred to the documents produced on record and submitted that there is on going dispute between rival parties. He submitted that initially the builders and others were ready and agreeable to pay Rs.80,00,000/- to the applicant and his family members by executing deed and now the case of the complainant is that the applicant herein has tried to extort money from Page 4 of 11 Uploaded by PATIL GAUTAMBHAI GOPALBHAI(HC00190) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:56:33 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/20772/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined the cousin brother of the complainant, however, the said story is not believable one. He submitted that at the time of registration of the FIR, the applicant was not available at the place of occurrence and then, suddenly they have also come with a case that there is mistake occurred in mentioning the correct date of incident. He further submitted that in one of the incident, the applicant was beaten, therefore, he was admitted in the Government Hospital for the purpose of getting treatment and the said fact can be verified from the Government hospital because when the applicant had tried to obtain documents from the concerned authority, he was not provided with the same. He further submitted that due to FIR lodged by the applicant, the persons from the builder lobby had come and taken one video, wherein they have stated in a very categorical terms that if anybody would like to register complaint against those reporters, in that event, they have to contact the person concerned, however, the fact remains that at the time of commission of crime, the applicant was not present at the place of occurrence. He submitted that considering the nature of allegations, custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary and the applicant will keep himself available during the course of investigation, trial also and will not flee from justice. He further submitted under the instructions that the applicant is ready and Page 5 of 11 Uploaded by PATIL GAUTAMBHAI GOPALBHAI(HC00190) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:56:33 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/20772/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined willing to abide by all the conditions including imposition of conditions while releasing the applicant on anticipatory bail. Learned advocate, therefore, submitted that considering the above facts, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.
8. 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. He submitted that it is the specific case of the prosecution that along with other accused, the applicant had gone at particular place and administered threats and also demanded money from the cousin brother of the complainant. He submitted that during the course of investigation, the statement of said person was recorded, wherein he has stated in a very categorical terms that due to some mistake on his part, he has stated incorrect date as the incident has occurred on 22.06.2025. He submitted that against the applicant, three are total 4 FIRs registered, due to which, there are all possible chances that the provision of GUJCTOC can be invoked against him. He further submitted that in fact, against the other persons also, who are having criminal history, the provision of the GUJCTOC have already been invoked. He, therefore, submitted that involvement of the applicant in the commission of crime is clearly spelt out, therefore, the present application may not be Page 6 of 11 Uploaded by PATIL GAUTAMBHAI GOPALBHAI(HC00190) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:56:33 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/20772/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined considered.
9. Learned advocate for the original complainant has also objected the present application contending that the applicant has actively participated in the alleged commission of crime. He submitted that though the applicant is an advocate by profession, he has indulging into such illegal activities, therefore, some builders have registered complaints against him. He submitted that here in the present case, the applicant along with other accused persons had administered threats to the cousin brother of the complainant and demanded money from him, therefore, the aforesaid FIR has been lodged, however due to some frustrated state of mind, incorrect date is mentioned but immediately on the next date, the complainant had approached the concerned Police Station and informed about the same. He further submitted that as the involvement of the applicant in the commission of crime is found out, this Hon'ble Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant, therefore, the present application may be rejected.
10. 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 Page 7 of 11 Uploaded by PATIL GAUTAMBHAI GOPALBHAI(HC00190) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:56:33 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/20772/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined 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 merit of the case, which may prejudice the accused, should be avoided.
11. I have considered the following aspects.
(a) for the so-called incident occurred during the period between 21.06.2025 to 09.07.2025, FIR has been lodged on 09.07.2025 against total four accused persons, wherein the applicant is shown as accused no.4;
(b) the applicant is an advocate by profession, against him, total 4 FIRs have been registered, out of which, the applicant has been granted bail in connection with 2 FIRs, whereas in connection with 1 FIR, he has been protected by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in a quashing petition, copy of said order is produced on record and this is the fourt one;Page 8 of 11 Uploaded by PATIL GAUTAMBHAI GOPALBHAI(HC00190) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:56:33 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/20772/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined
(c) it is found out from the material available on record that at the time of commission of crime, the applicant was not found available at the place of occurrence. Not only that, subsequently the complainant has come with a case that some mistake has occurred in mentioning the date of incident which in my considered opinion, prima facie not found to be believable;
(d) on going rivlary is going on between two groups and earlier also, the complainant had lodged one complaint against the rival parties because of the assault made upon him, where when the quashing petition on the ground of settlement was preferred, the applicant had objected to the same and, therefore, it was partly allowed, therefore keeping grudge about said fact, the present FIR has been lodged;
(e) considering the facts of the case, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required;
12. Considering the aforesaid aspects and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 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 & Ors. reported in (1980) 2 SCC 665 and also the decision Page 9 of 11 Uploaded by PATIL GAUTAMBHAI GOPALBHAI(HC00190) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:56:33 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/20772/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined in the case of Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, I am inclined to allow the present application.
13. In the result, the present application is allowed by directing that in the event of arrest / appearance of the applicant in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11191043250405 of 2025 registered with Shahpur Police Station, Ahmedabad City, the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions that applicant:
(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required;
(b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 19.10.2025 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. and the IO shall ensure that no unnecessary harassment or inconvenience is caused to the applicant;
(c) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;
(d) shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;
(e) shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the investigating officer and the court concerned and shall not change her/his residence till the final disposal of the case till further orders;
Page 10 of 11 Uploaded by PATIL GAUTAMBHAI GOPALBHAI(HC00190) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:56:33 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/20772/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025 undefined
(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the Court and if having passport shall deposit the same before the Trial Court within a week;
(g) an order of anticipatory bail does not in any manner limit or restrict the rights or duties of the police or investigative agency, to investigate into the charges against the person who seeks and is granted pre-arrest bail;
(h) It is open to the police or the investigating agency to move the learned trial Court for a direction under Section 483(2) to arrest the accused, in the event of violation of any term, such as absconding, non-cooperating during investigation, evasion, intimidation or inducement to witnesses with a view to influence outcome of the investigation or trial, etc.-
14. At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.
15. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct service is permitted.
Sd/-
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI, J.) Gautam Page 11 of 11 Uploaded by PATIL GAUTAMBHAI GOPALBHAI(HC00190) on Tue Oct 14 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 15 03:56:33 IST 2025