Gujarat High Court
Bharatbhai Becharbhai Bantiya vs State Of Gujarat on 29 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
Reserved On : 18/09/2025
Pronounced On : 29/09/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO.
1045 of 2025
==========================================================
BHARATBHAI BECHARBHAI BANTIYA & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BHARAT T RAO(697) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR P P MAJMUDAR(5284) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
CAV 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 applicants have
prayed for anticipatory bail in the event of
arrest in connection with the FIR being
C.R.No.11195034241017 of 2024 registered with
the Palanpur East Police Station, District
Banaskantha for the alleged offences as
mentioned in the FIR.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. B. T. Rao for the
applicants, learned APP Mr. Rohan Shah for
respondent - State and learned advocate Mr. P.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
P. Majmudar for the original complainant.
4. Learned advocate Mr. B. T. Rao for the
applicants submits that as per the case of the
prosecution, the so-called incident is occurred
during the period between 19.04.2018 to
11.08.2023, whereas, FIR is registered on
26.11.2024. Thus, FIR is registered after one
year from the date of occurrence of the so-
called incident. He further submits that
chequered history is involved in the present
matter and therefore before delving into the
allegations levelled in the FIR, he would like
to the bring to the notice of this Court certain
sequence of events of incident occurred in the
matter before the registration of the FIR.
Learned advocate Mr. Rao submits that applicant
No.1 herein had entered into an agreement with
the Administrator/President of one Harsiddhi
Sarvajanik Trust of Palanpur by executing
Memorandum of Understanding of partnership on
07.04.2018 and based upon the said MOU,
applicant Nos. 1 and 2 herein had become the
trustees of the said trust. He further submits
that as per the terms and conditions of the said
agreement, applicant No.1 had already invested
Rs.52 lakh to run and function one Narayani
B.Ed. College (at earlier point of time the
recognition of the said college has been
withdrawn by the NCTE) in the premises of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
Trust. Learned advocate Mr. Rao has referred
certain documents and submitted that as per the
terms and conditions of the said agreement,
applicant No.1 herein had already invested huge
amount of Rs. 52 lakh for functioning of the
aforesaid B.Ed. College and there is no dispute
about the same. He further submits that
thereafter on one fine day, behind the back of
the present applicant No.1, a resolution was
passed by the members of the Executive Committee
and on the strength of the said resolution, name
of the applicant had been removed as trustee of
the said trust and report to that effect is also
confirmed by the learned Assistant Charity
Commissioner, Palanpur. He submits that at that
relevant point of time, applicant was not aware
about the said development took place in the
matter, however, as soon as he came to know
about the same, he has raised objection before
the learned Charity Commissioner pointing out
that applicant No.1 was not taken into
confidence and he was not at all aware about the
fact that resolution was passed by the members
of the Executive Committee of the Trust to
remove him as a trustee of the said trust and
change report to that effect has already been
considered by the learned Assistant Charity
Commissioner, Palanpur. However, the objections
raised by the applicant have not been
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
entertained by the learned Assistant Charity
Commissioner, Palanpur. Therefore, being
aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said
decision, applicant preferred an appeal under
Section 70 of the Bombay Trust Act before the
Joint Charity Commissioner, Mehsana. The said
appeal has not been entertained by the learned
Joint Charity Commissioner, Mehsana. He has read
the said order and submitted that the reasoning
assigned by the learned Joint Charity
Commissioner is not in consonance with the
provisions of the Gujarat Public Trust Act but
he would not like to enter into the said dispute
at this juncture. He submits that the order
passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner,
Mehsana is challenged before this Court by way
of preferring Special Civil Application No.21379
of 2023, which is pending for adjudication.
5. Learned advocate Mr. Rao further submits that
applicant herein is a reputed person and used to
run and function four institutions in the
different part of the State. He further submits
that it is an admitted position of fact that for
the purpose of smooth running and functioning of
the said institutions, applicant No.1 herein had
invested Rs.52 lakh and he has rendered his
services in the said institutions during the
period between 2018 to 2023. Thus, the act of
the applicant No.1 clearly goes on to show that
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
he has acted bona fidely as an administrator of
the institution but as disputes have been
cropped up between other trustees and present
applicant, with a sole intent to kick him out of
the Trust, a well designed conspiracy has been
hatched by the other trustees and under the
guise of said sinister plan, applicant has
firstly been kicked out from the trust and
subsequently present FIR has been registered by
levelling false allegations. He further submits
that in fact during the interregnum period, the
then President has executed rent agreement with
the third party, and thereby, premises of the
college (property of the trust) has been handed
over to the said third party on rent. He further
submits that as soon as the said fact has come
to the knowledge of the present applicant, he
has written a letter to the NCTE, Delhi for
closure of B.Ed. course, as property is already
assigned to a third party on rent by executing
rent deed. He further submits that in fact
complainant and other persons are closely
connected with the persons, who are associated
with the present ruling Government, and
therefore, with a sole intent to harass the
present applicant, who belongs to Scheduled
Caste community, present FIR has been registered
by creating concocted story, which clearly goes
on to show that FIR is nothing but politically
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
motivated and registered with an oblique motive.
6. Learned advocate Mr. Rao further submits that in
fact when the applicant has come to know about
handing over the possession of the said
property, immediately he has raised objection.
However, applicant was kicked out from the
premises with the help of police machinery. Not
only that, applicant herein has also filed an
application in the form of complaint before the
police officer but no action has been taken by
the police machinery uptil now. Therefore,
applicant was constrained to prefer petition
before this Court, wherein, direction was issued
to the investigation officer to carry out
investigation and submit report. However, the
investigating officer submitted report that no
case could be said to have been made out against
the guilty persons. Therefore, applicant is
constrained to file private complaint before the
learned Court concerned, wherein after
considering the chequered history and materials
available on record, the Court concerned has
sought report from the investigating officer
concerned, wherein, recently report is submitted
inter alia stating that no offence is made out.
Learned advocate Mr. Rao submits that aggrieved
by and dissatisfied with the said decision,
applicant has initiated appropriate proceedings.
He submits that it seems that police machinery
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
is acting at the behest of the person who acts
behind the curtain in support of the
complainant, and therefore, no action has been
taken by the investigating officer against the
guilty persons, despite the fact that certain
glaring materials have been placed on record and
therefore by keeping the aforesaid factual
aspects in mind, at this juncture, he would like
to delve into the charge of accusations levelled
against the applicant in the FIR.
7. Learned advocate Mr. Rao has read the FIR and
forcefully submitted that nowhere in the entire
body of the FIR any charge of accusation is
levelled against the applicant Nos. 2 and 3. He
further submits that in fact the allegation of
misappropriation of amount of Rs.6,64,000/- is
concerned, he has already produced receipts and
being an administrator of the B.Ed. College,
applicant no.1 herein had purchased certain
books for the welfare and usage of the students.
Learned advocate Mr. Rao has further submitted
that so far as another charge is concerned,
applicant herein had already explained that
since the rent agreement has been executed by
the then president of the trust in favour of
third party, applicant no.1 thought it fit that
now it is not advisable to run and function the
B.Ed. College, as the property of the college is
already rented to a third party, and therefore,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
a letter was written to the authority concerned
for closure of the B.Ed. Course. So far as the
third accusation levelled against the applicant
is concerned, the amount of fees, alleged to
have been misappropriated by the applicant, has
already been deposited in the account of the
trust and applicant is not at all directly or
indirectly connected with the said offence. He
further submits that at the time of rejecting
the bail application of the applicant, the
learned Trial Court has come to the conclusion
that trust property cannot be handed over to the
third party by way of executing a deed. The
contents of the deed itself are not in
consonance with the provisions of the law and
therefore the said deed executed between the
present applicant and the
Administrator/President of the trust is per se
illegal and found to be void ab initio and
therefore reliance cannot be placed upon the
said document.
8. Learned advocate Mr. Rao further submits that
admittedly applicant No.1 herein has invested
huge volume of amount to run and function the
said institution and he has administered the
said institution for a period of five years and
with a sole intent to kick him out, a false and
fabricated FIR is registered. He further submits
that applicant Nos. 2 and 3 being ladies and
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
there is no past antecedents against them, they
may be enlarged on anticipatory bail by imposing
suitable terms and conditions. He further
submits that so far applicant Nos. 2 and 3 are
concerned, they are not directly or indirectly
connected with the commission of crime and
looking to their limited role, they may be
enlarged on anticipatory bail by imposing
suitable conditions. Therefore, applicants
may be enlarged on anticipatory bail by imposing
suitable conditions.
9. Per contra, present application is strongly
objected by learned APP Mr. Rohan Shah. Learned
APP Mr. Shah submits that by making cursory
glance upon the charge of accusations levelled
against the applicants in the impugned FIR, the
entire picture would be crystallized and
involvement of the applicants in the commission
of crime is clearly spelt out. He further
submits that charge of accusation levelled
against the applicant is essentially in three
folds; firstly, the applicant No.1 herein had
transferred an amount of Rs.6,64,000/- in the
account of his sister who used to reside at
Ahmedabad and directly and/or indirectly not
connected and/or associated with the affairs of
the trust. The said act of the applicant No.1
clearly goes on to show that with a sole intent
to misappropriate the fund of the trust, the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
said amount is transferred in the account of his
sister and as soon as FIR is registered,
immediately he came with the case that he had
purchased books for the welfare and usage of the
students from the said amount. Learned APP Mr.
Shah submits that during the course of
investigation, investigating officer has
recorded statements of the librarian and other
staffs of the college and perusal of the said
statements clearly goes on to show that till
date the said books have not seen the light of
the day and never reached to the office of the
trust and/or library. He submits that even if
the claim of the applicant No.1 is to be
accepted in its entirety, even though the said
amount cannot be routed through the account of
the sister of the present applicant and he
failed to offer any explanation for that. He
further submits that in fact the documents
collected by the investigating officer so far
clearly go on to show that sister of the
applicant is not working as an employee or
trustee of the said trust. Therefore, the said
amount is not required to be transferred in the
account of the sister of applicant No.1.
10. So far as second limb of allegation is
concerned, learned APP Mr. Shah submits that a
forged resolution came to be passed by the
applicant and based on that forged resolution,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
applicant No.1 herein had forwarded one letter
to the NCTE, Delhi for closure of B.Ed course.
He submits that signatures of total 26 persons
are found upon the forged resolution, and
therefore, during the course of investigation,
statements of some of those 26 persons have been
recorded and they have come with the specific
case that they were never part of any programme
wherein the said resolution has been passed. As
per their statements, even they had not signed
the said resolution and after making glance upon
the signatures of the so-called resolution, they
specifically stated that those signatures are
not belonging to them. He further submits that
during the course of investigation, it has come
on record that in the year 2015, some trustees
have passed one resolution and the applicant
No.1 had used the zerox copy of pages of the
said resolution, whereupon, signatures of the
trustees were there, and by attaching the copies
of those pages, applicant No.1 herein had forged
their signatures and passed resolution and based
upon that forged resolution, he had written a
letter to the NCTE, Delhi to close down the
course of B.Ed. Thus, a bogus and fabricated
document has been prepared by the applicant and
on the strength of the said fabricated document,
an attempt is being made to close down the
institution by putting the future of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
students as well as teaching and non-teaching
staff of the said institution at stake. He
further submits that so far as the third charge
of accusation levelled against the applicant is
concerned, he had misappropriate an amount of
approximately Rs.4 crore. He submits that as per
the claim of applicant No.1, he has been
appointed as a trustee. He submits that for the
sake of argument and without entering into the
maintainability of the MOU executed by and
between the Administrator/President of the Trust
and the present applicant No.1, at the most, it
can be said that applicant no.1 had become the
trustee of the said Trust and subsequently
handled and manged the affairs of the said
college but he was never appointed as the
Principal and/or Teacher of the said college.
During his regime, he has prepared false rubber-
stamp in the name of Principal of the college
and he has impersonated himself as the Principal
of the said college and prepared letterhead in
that regard and opened account in the Bank of
Baroda, Ahmedabad Branch and during the period
between 2018 to 2023, the applicant No.1 has
siphoned away an amount of around Rs.4 crore,
which was received by the trust/college as fees
of the students for all these years, by not
depositing it in the bank account of the
trust/college. He further submits that for the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
sake of argument and without admitting it, even
the MOU entered into by and between the
Administrator/President of the Trust and
applicant No.1 is believed to be maintainable,
in that event also, as per the condition of the
said MOU, the amount of fees received from the
students is also required to be distributed
between both the parties as per the ratio
suggested in the said MOU. However, as per the
case of the complainant, the entire amount of
fees received from the students has been
siphoned away by the applicant No.1. He further
submits that the statement of officer of the
Bank of Baroda is also brought on record, which
clearly goes on to show that the said account is
operated by the applicant No.1 herein and he has
produced all the documents which are required
for the purpose of opening the said account. He
further submits that though the applicant No.1
herein was working as a Principal in another
school, at the time of entering into an
agreement with the Trust, he has disclosed
incorrect fact that he is doing business, in
spite of the fact that he used to get salary
from the said school. The said fact is also
fortified from the evidence collected by the
investigating officer. He further submits that
the District Education Officer has forwarded
information to the investigating officer
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
concerned, specifically stating that applicant
No.1 was working in another institution as a
Principal and used to receive salary regularly.
The salary slip of the applicant No.1 is also
produced on record.
11. Learned APP Mr. Shah further submits that during
the course of investigation, investigating
officer has tried to collect certain
information/documents from the applicant but he
has not extended full cooperation. He further
submits that the resolution book of the Trust,
wherein, the resolution as regards closure of
course of B.Ed. has been passed, is still lying
in the custody of the present applicant. The
said book is required to be recovered for the
purpose of necessary investigation. He further
submits that in fact two to three offences of
similar nature came to be registered against the
applicant No.1 herein, wherein, it is alleged
that applicant No.1 used to create disturbance
in the process of smooth functioning of the
investigation by way of filing petition before
this Court and/or other Courts for some small
and trivial issues, therefore, investigating
officer has to wait for the outcome of the said
proceedings, which ultimately resulted into
delay in investigation. He further submits that
the cumulative effect of the above stated
documents collected by the IO so far, clearly
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
and irresistibly go on to show that present
applicants are directly involved in the
commission of crime and they have acted in a
particular manner to misappropriate huge volume
of amount of the trust. He further submits that
applicant No.1 herein had also made an attempt
to destabilize the smooth functioning of the
college by way of preparing bogus and fabricated
document and at the end of the day put the
future of the students and teaching and non-
teaching staff of the said college at a stake.
Therefore, this is a fit case, wherein,
discretionary powers of anticipatory bail may
not be exercised in favour of the applicant at
this stage. He further submits that
investigation is at a nascent stage and certain
important documents are also required to be
collected by the investigating officer for the
purpose of carrying out investigation in a right
direction. Therefore, custodial interrogation of
the applicants is badly needed. He further
submits that in fact the applicant No.1 herein
has filed quashing petition before this Court,
wherein, though notice came to be issued,
applicant has not been protected by this Court.
He further submits that at the time of filing of
the present anticipatory bail application,
applicants have come with the specific case that
the audit reports for the period in question
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
have been prepared and forwarded to the office
of Charity Commissioner and till date any
objection has not been raised by the office of
Charity Commissioner and based on the said fact,
the investigating officer concerned has carried
out investigation and also written a letter to
the office of Charity Commissioner and demanded
the said set of documents. At that relevant
point of time, shocking facts have come to the
notice of the investigating officer that the
documents placed before this Court are not
forwarded to the office of the Charity
Commissioner. Therefore, prima facie, it seems
that applicant used to place on record the
documents, which support the case of the
applicant, which clearly goes on to show the
mindset of the applicant. He, therefore, submits
that considering the aforesaid totality of the
facts of the present case, applicants may not be
enlarged on anticipatory bail.
12. Learned advocate Mr. P. P. Majmudar appearing
for the original First Informant has objected
present application with vehemence and submitted
that almost all issues have been covered by the
learned APP and therefore he need not have to
say much. He submits that so far as the
allegations levelled against the applicants in
the FIR are concerned, it is alleged that (1)
applicant Nos.1 and 2 have made forgery of one
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
resolution based upon which applicant No.1 has
written a letter to the NCET, Delhi to close
down the course of B.Ed. (2) all the applicants
have, in connivance with each other,
misappropriated the fund of the Trust by
transferring the amount of Rs.6,64,000/- in the
account of applicant No.3 i.e. the sister of
applicant No.1 under the guise of purchasing
books for the welfare and usage of the students
and (3) the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 being the
trustees of the trust have siphoned away the
amount of fees of more than Rs. 4 crore by not
depositing it in the bank account of the
college/trust. Thus, all the accused persons
have, in connivance with each other, committed
the offence, as alleged in the FIR, therefore,
considering the fact that the investigation is
at a nascent stage and prima facie involvement
of all the accused persons in the commission of
crime is clearly found out from the materials
and/or documents collected by the investigating
officer during the course of investigation, this
is a fit case, wherein, discretionary powers of
anticipatory bail may not be exercised in
favour of the applicants.
13. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for
the parties and perused the materials placed on
record, it is found out from the record that one
MOU came to be executed by and between the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
Administrator/President of one Harsiddhi
Sarvajanik Trust and applicant No.1 herein. The
attention of this Court has been drawn by
learned advocate Mr. Rao for the applicants to
the said MOU, which is placed on record. I have
perused the contents of the said MOU, wherein,
it is stated that applicant No.1 herein has
invested an amount of Rs.52 lakh for once again
starting the college situated in the premises of
the said Trust viz. Narayani B.Ed. College,
which was closed down by the competent
authority. By way of the said MOU, applicant
No.1 has been appointed as a Secretary and
applicant No.2 has been appointed as a trustee
of the aforesaid trust. Thereafter, applicant
No.1 has also been appointed as a trustee of the
aforesaid trust and change report to that effect
has also been considered by the learned Charity
Commissioner concerned. Thus, names of the
applicant Nos. 1 and 2 have been inducted as the
trustees of the aforesaid trust. It is also
and 2 were trustees of the aforesaid trust
during the period between 19.04.2018 to
22.06.2023. It is the case of the prosecution
that as the complainant has been inducted as a
trustee of the aforesaid trust and present
applicant Nos. 1 and 2 have been removed as
trustees of the aforesaid trust, during the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
internal inquiry, certain irregularities have
come to the notice of the complainant and
therefore he has lodged the FIR against the
applicants. Now, so far as the allegations
levelled against the applicants are concerned,
it is alleged that applicant No.1, in connivance
with applicant No.3, has transferred the fund of
the trust worth Rs.6,64,000/- in the account of
applicant No.3, who is his sister and not
directly or indirectly connected and/or
associated with the affairs of the
trust/college. However, it is the case of the
applicants that said fund has been used for
purchasing the books for the welfare and usage
of the students of the college, whereas, it is
the case of the prosecution that applicants have
come with the aforesaid case only after the
registration of the FIR and the said books had
never reached to the students and/or library of
the college and therefore, for carrying out
investigation in proper direction, custodial
interrogation of the applicants is badly needed.
The second limb of charge of accusation is that
applicant No.1 has written a letter to the NCTE,
Delhi for closure of B.Ed. course based upon a
forged resolution, wherein, applicant No.1 and
applicant No.2 along with other trustees have
put their signatures. It is the case of the
prosecution that applicant No.1 has forged the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
resolution by using the xerox copies of pages of
earlier resolution of 2015, whereupon, the
signatures of the then trustees were there or by
preparing a list of those trustees and forging
their signatures, and by sending the copy of the
said forged resolution to the NCTE, Delhi, he
has requested for closure of the B.Ed. Course.
During the course of investigation, the
investigating officer has recorded the
statements of trustees of the Trust whose
signatures were found on the forged resolution.
In their statements, they had very categorically
stated that they were not part of any general
assembly meeting of the trust, wherein, the said
resolution has been passed nor they had made any
signature upon the said resolution. Thus, from
the overall materials produced on record, the
only allegation against the applicant No.2 is
that she has also put her signature on the
forged resolution along with other trustees
based on which the NCTE, Delhi has closed the
B.Ed. Course. It is also pertinent to note that
applicant No.1 was trustee of the Trust during
the period between 19.04.2018 to 22.06.2023 and
he had written a letter to the NCTE, Delhi on
10.07.2023. Thus, when the applicant No.1 had
written a letter to the NCTE, Delhi, he ceased
to be the trustee of the trust, in spite of
that, he had written a letter to the NCTE, Delhi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
for closure of B.Ed. course only with an intent
to teach the lesson to the newly elected body of
the Trust, which shows his mala fide intention.
The third charge of accusation levelled against
the applicants is that applicant No.1 had
prepared bogus stamp as well as other documents
in the name of Principal of the College and
impersonated himself as the Principal of the
college and opened one bank account in Bank of
Baroda in the name of Narayani College of
Education and during the period between 2018 to
2023, he has siphoned away an amount of
approximately Rs.4 crore, which was paid by the
students as fees during the said period, without
depositing it in the bank account of the
Trust/College. It is also the case of the
prosecution that applicant No.1 was working as a
Principal in another school and at the time of
execution of the MOU with the
Administrator/President of the Trust, he has
made an incorrect statement that he is the
businessman and doing business. It is also
pertinent to note that applicant No.1 has also
past antecedents. I have also perused the
statements of various witnesses, which are
referred to and relied upon by the learned APP
during the course of hearing of this
application.
14. It is pertinent to note that applicant Nos. 1
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
and 3 are brother and sister. The applicant No.1
had transferred an amount of Rs.6,64,000/- (fund
of the trust) in the account of the applicant
No.3, who is not associated and/or connected
with the affairs of the trust/college and prima
facie it cannot be said that applicant No.3 was
unaware about the said transaction. Thus, from
the materials placed on record including the
police papers prima facie involvement of the
applicant Nos. 1 and 3 in the commission of
crime is found out. However, so far as applicant
No.2 is concerned, considering the averments
made in the FIR as well as other materials
placed on record, I am of the opinion that prima
facie, prosecuting agency has failed to show
that she is directly or indirectly connected
and/or associated with the commission of crime.
Hence, the application deserves to be allowed
qua the said applicant.
15. The basic and essential criterion, which is
required to be kept in mind by the Court at the
time of deciding an application seeking
anticipatory bail, is the prima facie
involvement of the accused in the commission of
crime or not. The parameters and criteria for
deciding anticipatory bail and regular bail are
quite different and distinct and the leniency,
which the Court generally shows at the time of
deciding regular bail application, is not
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
required to be shown at the time of deciding
anticipatory bail application.
16. I have also perused the contents of the FIR as
well as other corroborative materials in the
form of statements of the witnesses and
considering the said materials, I am of the
opinion that, prima facie, applicant Nos. 1 and
3 are involved in the commission of crime.
Though at the stage of deciding bail, an
elaborate examination of evidence and detailed
reasons touching the merit of the case, which
may prejudice the accused, should be avoided.
Therefore, at this stage, without discussing the
evidence in detail, I restrict myself to the
extent of giving the opinion of prima facie
involvement of the applicant Nos. 1 and 3 in the
commission of crime.
17. It is required to be noted that no doubt this
Court has extraordinary powers to protect an
innocent person, however, the said power has to
be exercised by the Courts with due
circumspection. 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
is the prima facie case against the accused. The
relevant 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
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
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."
18. 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 Nos. 1 and 3 and material
collected so far suggests the involvement of
those applicants in the commission of crime.
Hence, I am not inclined to exercise
discretionary powers of anticipatory bail in
favour of applicant Nos. 1 and 3.
19. In the result, application is partly allowed qua
applicant No.2 - viz. Pushpaben Bharatbhai
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
Bantiya by directing that in the event of arrest
/ appearance of the applicant No.2 - viz.
Pushpaben Bharatbhai Bantiya in connection with
FIR being C.R.No.11195034241017 of 2024
registered with the Palanpur East Police
Station, District Banaskantha, she 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 she:
(a) shall cooperate with the investigation
and make herself available for
interrogation whenever required;
(b) shall remain present at the concerned
Police Station on 03.10.2025 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 residence till the final
disposal of the case till further orders;
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
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.-
20. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct service is permitted.
21. 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)
FURTHER ORDER
After the pronouncement of the order,
learned advocate Mr. Rao, appearing for the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1045/2025 CAV ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
applicants, has requested for stay of the
operation, execution and implementation of the
order qua the applicant Nos.1 and 3, so as to
enable them to approach before the higher forum.
On the other hand, learned APP has strongly
objected to the said request. Thus, considering
the facts and circumstances of the present case,
the request made by learned advocate for the
applicants is not acceded to.
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J)
LAVKUMAR J JANI
