Gujarat High Court
Vireshkumar Ashokbhai Mehta vs State Of Gujarat on 25 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14363/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
Reserved On : 21/07/2025
Pronounced On : 25/07/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 14363
of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI Sd/
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
==========================================================
VIRESHKUMAR ASHOKBHAI MEHTA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR YASH N NANAVATY(5626) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. NIRAJ SHARMA, LD. ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
CAV JUDGMENT
1. Rule returnable forthwith. 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.11206075250585 of 2025 registered with Visnagar Town
Police Station, Mehsana for the alleged offences as mentioned
in the FIR.
3. Learned senior advocate Mr. Nirupam D. Nanavaty
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14363/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
assisted by learned advocate Mr. Yash N. Nanavaty appearing
for the applicant submits that the allegations made in the FIR
are of such a nature, for which, custodial interrogation of the
applicant at this stage is not necessary. He further submits
that the applicant will keep himself available during the course
of investigation as well as the trial proceedings and will not
flee from justice. He further submits that the FIR is dated
18.06.2025 for the incident alleged to have been taken place
during the period between 15.07.2023 and 30.06.2024, and as
such, there is a delay of almost one year in registering the FIR
without there being any plausible reason being explained. He
also submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been
falsely implicated in the present offence. Learned senior
advocate Mr. Nanavaty submits that, it's a case of consensual
relationship between the applicant and the complainant, and
the said fact is clearly evident from the contents of the FIR,
wherein the complainant herself has stated that the
complainant and the applicant developed intimacy with each
other, and as such, it clearly appears that it was a consensual
relationship between the applicant and the complainant, and
therefore, no offence as alleged can be said to have been
committed by the applicant. Learned senior advocate Mr.
Nanavaty submits that it was an extramarital affair between
the applicant and the complainant, as they both were married
at the time of commission of the alleged offence. He submits
that so far as the allegation of sending the obscene
photographs of the complainant on the mobile phone of the
husband and sister of the complainant is concerned, the same
was sent by the wife of the applicant, as usual, out of rage,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14363/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
anger and pain being the wife, with a view to bring it to their
notice about the said illicit relationship of the complainant with
her husband, and the said photographs was not sent by the
present applicant, and as such, no role can be attributed to the
present applicant so far as sending of obscene photographs
are concerned.
4. Learned senior advocate Mr. Nanavaty further submits
that the accused No.2, i.e, the wife of the present applicant,
who forwarded the obscene photographs of the complainant on
the WhatsAPP of the husband and sister of the complainant,
has already been protected by the Coordinate Bench of this
Court in a quashing petition filed by her, and therefore, on this
ground also, the applicant may be released on anticipatory
bail. Moreover, the applicant does not have any past
antecedents. Thus, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of
the present case, as stated above, none of the ingredients to
constitute the offence, both under the provisions of the I.T. Act
and under the penal provisions, are attracted against the
present applicant. Learned senior advocate Mr. Nanavaty
further submits that the present FIR is nothing but an
afterthought being filed with an ulterior and oblique motive,
after being reconciled with her husband.
5. Learned advocate Mr. Nanavaty submits even if the
allegations made in the FIR is to be read at their face value, it
appears that the present applicant did not make any promise
of marriage to the complainant, but he just told her that he
would treat her like a wife, and thus, the allegation of being
promised to marry, does not have a leg to stand, and as such,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14363/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the
present case, as stated herein above, the present applicant
deserves to be released on anticipatory bail. To bolster his
submissions, learned senior advocate Mr. Nanavaty has placed
reliance upon the decision of this very Court in the case of
Marshall Amubhai Vadariya vs. State of Gujarat & Anr.,
Criminal Misc. Application No.21237 of 2019, decided on
19.09.2024, and in the case of Naim Ahmed vs. State (NCT of
Delhi), 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 66.
6. On the other hand, the present application has been
vehemently opposed by the learned APP. Learned APP submits
that the present applicant has been named in the FIR along
with his specific role. He further submits that the present
applicant took advantage of the situation and entered into
physical relationship with the complainant, under the pretext
that he would treat her as a wife. The offence alleged to have
been committed by the present applicant is quite serious in
nature and is required to be investigated thoroughly, and for
that, custodial interrogation of the present applicant is very
much necessary. Learned APP further submits that even after
the reconciliation with her husband, the present applicant used
to harass the complainant and forced her to abandon her
husband and part ways from him. Not only that, the present
applicant also took nude photographs of the complainant while
they were talking on video call, and then, under the pretext of
getting the said photographs public, entered into the physical
relationship with the complainant. He submits that if he will be
set at liberty, then he would definitely try to tamper with the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14363/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
evidences and would also try to threaten the complainant and
the witnesses and there are all possible chances that he would
create hindrance in the investigation. Thus, considering the
above stated facts and circumstances of the present case, the
applicant may not be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
7. The present application has also been opposed by
learned advocate Mr. Yash Joshi appearing for the complainant.
He submits that the present applicant took advantage of the
on going disputes between the complainant and her husband,
and then contacted the complainant and established a
relationship, under the guise to marry her. He submits that at
the time of committing the offence, the applicant was also a
married man, and despite the same, he made a false promise
to the complainant and entered into a physical relationship.
The present applicant also took the nude photographs of the
complainant in his mobile, and by threatening the complainant
to get the obscene photographs public, forced the complainant
to maintain physical relationship with him. Therefore,
considering the allegations made in the FIR and the role
attributed to the present applicant, this is not a fit case to
exercise discretion in favour of the present applicant.
8. 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 settled that, among other circumstances,
the factors to be borne in mind while considering an
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14363/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
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. I
have considered the following aspects.
(a) It appears that there was a consensual relationship
between the applicant and the complainant, and at the time of
the alleged offence, the complainant was major, and matured
enough to understand the pros and cons of the act being
permitted to be done upon herself;
(b) It appears that, both the applicant and the complainant
were married at the time of commission of the offence, and it
was an extramarital affair between the applicant and the
complainant, and it appears that the applicant did not make
any promise to marry her, as the applicant was a married man,
and the complainant was also knowing the said fact at the time
of entering into the physical relationship with the applicant;
(c) That, the obscene photographs were forwarded by the
wife of the applicant, i.e., accused No.2, who has already been
protected by the Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court in a
quashing petition filed by her, and as such, in view of the said
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14363/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
development, in my view, the applicant is also entitled to be
released on anticipatory bail;
(d) Moreover, there is a delay of almost one year in
registering the FIR;
(e) The applicant does not have any criminal history;
(f) That, the applicant is ready and willing to cooperate in the
investigation;
9. 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 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.
10. 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.11206075250585 of 2025
registered with Visnagar Town Police Station, Mehsana, the
applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal
bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one
surety of like amount on the following conditions that
applicant:
(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14363/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
available for interrogation whenever required;
(b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on
01.08.2025 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 applicants;
(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;
(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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14363/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
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.-
11. 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.
12. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct
service is permitted.
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J)
VAHID
