Gujarat High Court
Arjun Ganesh Kadu vs State Of Gujarat on 4 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/16990/2025 ORDER DATED: 04/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO.
16990 of 2025
==========================================================
ARJUN GANESH KADU
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
JAYDEEP H SINDHI(9585) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS JYOTI BHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
Date : 04/09/2025
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.11199060240042 of 2024 registered with the Panoli Police Station, Bharuch for the alleged offences as mentioned in the FIR.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Jaydeep Sindhi for the applicant and learned APP Ms. Jyoti Bhatt for the respondent - State.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Sindhi submits that one FIR has been registered with Panoli Police Station Page 1 of 8 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:22:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/16990/2025 ORDER DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined on 01.02.2024 for the alleged offences as mentioned in the FIR against one known person and one unknown person. He submits that pursuant to the registration of the aforesaid FIR, investigation commenced and during the course of investigation, name of the applicant has come on surface on the basis of the statement made by the co-accused. He further submits that applicant herein is not directly or indirectly connected and/or associated with the commission of crime. He was not at all available at the place of occurrence. He further submits that it is the specific case of the prosecution that members of police party had intercepted one vehicle and during the course of search, certain prohibited articles were found from the said vehicle and therefore FIR came to be registered against the driver of the said vehicle. However, during the interrogation of the driver, name of the applicant has come on surface. He further submits that there is no recovery and/or discovery at the instance of the applicant. He further submits that there is no past history of criminal antecedent against the applicant. Considering the aforesaid totality of the facts of the matter, applicant may be enlarged on bail.
5. On the other hand, learned APP Ms. Jyoti Bhatt has objected the present application with Page 2 of 8 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:22:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/16990/2025 ORDER DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined vehemence and submitted that name as well as specific role of the applicant has come on surface. It is the specific case of the prosecution that on the basis of inputs received from the reliable source, members of the police party have intercepted one vehicle and thereafter search was carried out and at that relevant point of time, huge volume of prohibited articles was recovered from the said vehicle. She further submits that during the interrogation of the driver, he has produced certain documents which clearly go on to show that under the guise of transportation of medicine, contraband and prohibited articles were transported from the State of Gujarat to Goa. Therefore, a systematic plan is organized by all the accused persons to throw sand in the eyes of police machinery. She further submits that during the course of investigation, it has come on record that the said prohibited goods were loaded in the vehicle at the instance of the present applicant and applicant is in constant touch with the driver which is fortified from the Call Details Record collected by the investigating officer. Thus, the materials collected by the IO prima facie leads towards the involvement of the applicant in the commission of crime. Therefore, applicant may not be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
Page 3 of 8 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:22:56 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/16990/2025 ORDER DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined
6. Learned advocate Mr. Sindhi submits that in fact the mobile number upon which reliance is being placed by the prosecuting agency is not belonging to the applicant and applicant herein is not at all connected with the co-accused.
7. Per contra, learned APP Ms. Bhatt submits that in fact during the course of investigation, investigating officer has recorded statement of the father of the applicant, wherein, he has very categorically stated that the said mobile number belongs to his son. He has disclosed three mobile numbers, out of which, one number is telling with the number mentioned in the CDR. He has also stated that his son is also indulged in the business of transportation, which clearly goes on to show that present applicant is directly involved in the commission of crime. Therefore, this is not a fit case wherein this Hon'ble Court may have to exercise discretion in favour of the applicant.
8. Having heard learned advocates appearing for both the parties and having gone through the materials placed on record, it is found out that on the basis of secret information received from the reliable source, the members of the raiding party have carried out raid and intercepted one vehicle and during the course of search, huge volume of prohibited articles was recovered from the said vehicle. Thereafter, during the Page 4 of 8 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:22:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/16990/2025 ORDER DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined interrogation of the driver, he has disclosed the name of the present applicant. It is found out from the record that under the guise of transportation of medicine, contraband and prohibited articles were transported from the State of Gujarat to Goa. Therefore, in the opinion of this Court, a systematic plan is organized by the accused persons with a sole intent to transport the prohibited articles. It is also found out from the record that the said prohibited goods were loaded in the vehicle at the instance of the present applicant and applicant is in constant touch with the driver, which is corroborated from the Call Details Record collected by the investigating officer. Thus, the materials collected by the IO prima facie suggests involvement of the applicant in the commission of crime. Therefore, I am of the opinion that prima facie case is made out against the applicant.
9. 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 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 Page 5 of 8 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:22:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/16990/2025 ORDER DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined 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. 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 Page 6 of 8 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:22:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/16990/2025 ORDER DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined 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."
10. Thus, while taking into consideration the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre as also ratio laid down in other decisions, 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 the involvement of the applicant in the commission of crime.
11. 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 Page 7 of 8 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:22:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/16990/2025 ORDER DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined 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.
12. Hence, the present application seeking anticipatory bail, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed. Notice is discharged.
13. 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 8 of 8 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:22:56 IST 2025