Saurabh Bohitram Agarwal vs State Of Gujarat
2025 Latest Caselaw 86 Guj

Gujarat High Court

Saurabh Bohitram Agarwal vs State Of Gujarat on 2 May, 2025

                                                                                                            NEUTRAL CITATION




                            R/CR.MA/16864/2024                                ORDER DATED: 02/05/2025

                                                                                                            undefined




                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
                       R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 16864
                                                  of 2024
                       ==========================================================
                                                     SAURABH BOHITRAM AGARWAL
                                                               Versus
                                                         STATE OF GUJARAT
                       ==========================================================
                       Appearance:
                       MR JINESH H KAPADIA(5601) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
                       MR YASH K DAVE(10269) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
                       MR HARDIK MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
                       ==========================================================
                         CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                                                          Date : 02/05/2025

                                                           ORAL ORDER

RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1 - State of Gujarat.

[1.0] By way of the present application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNSS"), the applicant - accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11191010240465 /2024 registered with Madhavpura Police Station, Ahmedabad City, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 120 B of the IPC.

[2.0] Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and he is falsely implicated in the offence. Now nothing remains to be recovered or discovered from the present applicant. It is submitted that pursuant to the order dated 28.08.2024 passed by the Co-

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/16864/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/05/2025

undefined

ordinate Bench of this Court, the applicant remained present before the I.O. and has joined the investigation twice. Thereafter, interim relief was granted. It is submitted that applicant is enjoying interim relief till date. Therefore, custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. In view of the above, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.

[3.0] 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.

[4.0] Having heard the learned advocate 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 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.

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/16864/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/05/2025

undefined

(1) Alleged offence is punishable upto 7 years; (2) Pursuant to the order dated 28.04.2025 passed by the Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court, the applicant remained present before the I.O. and joined the investigation. Therefore, no purpose would be served by rejecting the bail application of the applicant.

(3) Offence is triable by the JMFC;

Without further discussing in detail, the present application deserves consideration;

[5.0] This court has also considered the judgment in the case of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273, Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. reported in (2022)10 SCC 51 and Md. Asfak Alam vs. State of Jharkhand and Another reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 892 wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has observe that whenever there is punishment of 7 years, then the court would be liberal to exercise the discretion. Further, by exercising the discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C/under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNSS"), the doors of remand by the Investigating Officer is open and therefore also this court is inclined to exercise powers under Section 438 of Cr.P.C./under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNSS").

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/16864/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/05/2025

undefined

[6.0] In the result, the present application is allowed by directing that in the event of arrest / appearance of the applicant in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11191010240465 /2024 registered with Madhavpura Police Station, Ahmedabad City, 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 available for interrogation whenever required;

(b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 09/05/2025 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 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

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/16864/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/05/2025

undefined

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.-

[7.0] 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.

[8.0] Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Application is disposed of accordingly. Direct service is permitted.

(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) KUMAR ALOK