Maheshbhai Durlabhbhai @ Dulabhai ... vs State Of Gujarat

Gujarat High Court

Maheshbhai Durlabhbhai @ Dulabhai ... vs State Of Gujarat on 17 April, 2026

                                                                                                       NEUTRAL CITATION




                              R/CR.MA/4425/2026                          ORDER DATED: 17/04/2026

                                                                                                        undefined




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD


                             R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY
                                           BAIL) NO. 4425 of 2026

                        ================================================
                           MAHESHBHAI DURLABHBHAI @ DULABHAI KATARIA
                                                    Versus
                                           STATE OF GUJARAT
                        ================================================
                        Appearance:
                        MR. RAHIL P JAIN(7305) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
                        MR. MAULIK M SONI(7249) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
                        MR TIRTHRAJ PANDYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
                        ================================================

                        CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL

                                                    Date : 17/04/2026

                                                    ORAL ORDER

1. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule for respondent - State of Gujarat.

2. By way of this 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. 11203068260031 of 2026, registered with Vanthali Police Station, District: Junagadh for the offences punishable under Sections 108 and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/4425/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/04/2026 undefined

3. The gravamen of the complaint is that possession of the land belonged to the father of the de facto complainant namely Karshanbhai Govindbhai Kataria since was with the original accused No. 3 and as all the accused were pressurizing the him to transfer the said land in the name of original accused No. 5, the father of the de facto complainant committed suicide on 01.01.2026 by strangulation and hence, for the alleged offence, FIR in question came to be filed against the accused.

4. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the nature of allegations are such that custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. It is further submitted that the applicant will keep himself available during the course of investigation and trial also and will not flee from justice.

4.1 The learned advocate for the applicant further states that the applicant shall abide by all the conditions that may be imposed while granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. Accordingly, it is urged that this application may be allowed and to grant the anticipatory bail to the applicant.

5. As against this, the 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 and requested not to entertain this application. He submitted that the applicant is named in the Suicide Note and on account of Page 2 of 7 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Fri Apr 17 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 18 02:27:30 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/4425/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/04/2026 undefined pressure by the present applicant, the deceased committed suicide and accordingly, it is urged to reject this application.

5.1 Learned advocate for the de facto complainant while opposing the application submitted that deceased was pressurized to transfer the land by the present applicant and was threatened and the deceased since could not bear the pressure, committed suicide. Accordingly, he also urges to reject this application.

6. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and perusing the papers available on record, it is incumbent upon the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously, cautiously and strictly in compliance with the basic principles laid down in plethora of decisions of the 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 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 merits of the case, which may prejudice the case of accused, should be avoided. However, following aspects have been taken into Page 3 of 7 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Fri Apr 17 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 18 02:27:30 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/4425/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/04/2026 undefined consideration:

a) alleged incident of suicide is of 01.01.2026 whereas, the present applicant with co-accused had taken the deceased in the car on 29.12.2026 and thus, the alleged incident of suicide occurred after 2 days;

b) for abetment to suicide prima facie there has to be proximate prior act due to which, the suicide was the direct consequence because of continuous harassment which prima facie does not surface on record from the investigation papers as well as the FIR;

c) the FIR is lodged on 17.01.2026 and the alleged incident of suicide is of 01.01.2026 and there is no palpable explanation is coming forward in the FIR for delay in lodging, which would be evident from column No. 8 of FIR, which is blank;

d) land was given for cultivation to the father of the present applicant 20 years back and in 2010, an application was preferred at the Vanthali Police Station after which, the land was handed over to the deceased, however, since last about 10 years as the deceased was not cultivating the land, the land was again handed over to the father of the present applicant;

e) the allegations in the FIR are to the effect that since last two years, the applicant and other co-accused were, time and again, were pressurizing the deceased to transfer the land in the name of the mother of the applicant namely Manjuben and the deceased was lastly taken in the car where, as alleged, the applicant and the co-accused had pressurized the deceased for compromise and thereafter, after two days, the alleged incident of suicide had occurred;

f) a bare reading of the FIR reveals that after completion of after death rituals of the deceased, the mother of the Page 4 of 7 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Fri Apr 17 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 18 02:27:30 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/4425/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/04/2026 undefined complainant informed regarding deceased having taken in the car by the co-accused on 29.12.2025;

g) without discussing merits or demerits, it transpires that the land in question was handed over to the father of the present applicant 20 years back and had also borrowed money to the tune of Rs.40,000/- which is also evidence from the statement of the witnesses;

h) merely because the applicant had accompanied and/or taken the deceased in the car and allegedly was pressurizing the deceased for entering into the compromise, prima facie it does not attract the offence of abetment to suicide;

i) even from a reading of the suicide note, it is clear that except for stating that they were mentally harassing, there is no other evidence on record to show that the applicant was pressurizing the deceased for transferring the land in the name of the mother of the applicant, cannot, in itself, be termed as attracting the provisions of Section 108 r/w. 54 of the BNS;

j) the applicant has no past antecedents;

c) the learned advocate for the applicant has assured that the applicant will not flee from justice and would be available during investigation as well as the trial.

7. Considering the aforesaid aspects and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others, 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 & Others, reported in (1980) 2 SCC 665 and also the decision in the case of Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), Page 5 of 7 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Fri Apr 17 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 18 02:27:30 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/4425/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/04/2026 undefined reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Court is inclined to allow the present application.

8. In the result, this application is allowed by directing that in the event of arrest/ appearance of the applicant in connection with the above-referred FIR, the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions that applicant:

(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make available for interrogation whenever required;

(b) 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;

(c) 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;

(d) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 23.04.2026 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;

(e) shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the investigating officer and the court concerned and shall not change residence till the final disposal of the case till further orders;

(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;

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/4425/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/04/2026 undefined

g) shall not enter into Vanthali village till the Charge- sheet is filed;

(h) It is open to the police or the investigating agency to move the learned trial Court for a direction under Section 483(2) of the BNSS 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. 8.1 At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court while considering the bail application.

9. It is made clear that this 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 applicant who is granted pre-arrest bail.

10. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.

[ P. M. Raval, J. ] hiren/SB/1/13tss17426 Page 7 of 7 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Fri Apr 17 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 18 02:27:30 IST 2026