[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Patel Rahulkumar Kirtibhai vs State Of Gujarat on 7 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3654/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 3654
of 2026
==========================================================
PATEL RAHULKUMAR KIRTIBHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MONTUBHAI G PATEL(9299) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR AMIT N CHAUDHARY(5599) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR VISHVAJITSINH D CHAUHAN(10160) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR.KISHAN PRAJAPATI(7074) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
PRANAV DHAGAT APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
Date : 07/04/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Zubin Bharda for the
Applicant, learned Advocate Ms. Mahesh Pujara for Mr. Kishan
Prajapati for the Respondent, and learned APP Mr. Pranav
Dhagat for the Respondent-State.
2. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives
service of notice of rule for respondent - State of Gujarat.
3. 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.
11209041260050, registered with Prantij Police Station,
District: Sabarkantha for the offences punishable under
Sections 64(2)(m), 77 of BNS as well as 66e of IT Act, 2008.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3654/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2026
undefined
4. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on
24.03.2026, the statement of the Applicant has been recorded
by the investigating agency on 28.03.2026, and the mobile
phone has also been handed over to the investigating agency
for the purpose of further investigation and for being sent to
the FSL.
5. It is the case of the Complainant that the Complainant is
residing at Juna Bakarpur, Taluka Prantij, District Sabarkantha.
She appeared in person and declares that she resides with her
family and performs housework and animal husbandry. Her
marriage took place about 25 years ago in Juna Bakarpur
village. She has two children. Her eldest son is aged about 24
years and is studying in the third year of Science at M.C. Desai
College, Prantij; the younger one is aged about 19 years and is
studying in the first year of PTC at A.K. Patel College, Prantij.
Her husband is engaged in farming.
5.1. It is alleged in the FIR that her paternal home is at the
house of Hareshbhai Nathabhai Patel at Prantij Patel Vas of
Prantij Taluka. She has studied up to SYBA. Her house is
situated behind the house of the Applicant. About four years
ago, in the year 2021, in the month of June, the Applicant, who
lives behind her house, told her that "when you come to the
bathroom at your home to bathe and wash or change clothes,
those photos and videos are in my mobile; if you do not
maintain a relationship with me, I will make your photos and
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3654/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2026
undefined
videos viral on social media."
5.2 Upon him saying this, she became very scared, so the
Applicant told her that "If you want to delete the photos and
videos in my mobile, you will have to come to Himmatnagar to
meet me where I call." When she explained to the Applicant
not to do this, he said that "if you want the photos and videos
deleted, you will have to come to meet me where I call."
5.3 Since she has two children, and to ensure her married life
was not ruined and her reputation in society was not lost, when
the Applicant called her to Himmatnagar to meet, she went to
Himmatnagar. The Applicant told her to come to Namo Hotel
near Himmatnagar toll tax, so she went to Namo Hotel, and
when she told the Applicant to delete her photos and videos,
he said that "you will have to have physical relations with him
and then he will delete the photos and videos."
5.4 Upon him saying this, to ensure her reputation in society
was not lost, she accepted his words and he forcibly had
physical relations with her. After that, when she told the
Applicant to delete her photos and videos, he did not delete
her photos and videos. About fifteen days after that, the
Applicant told her that, "If you come to meet me at Majra
Krishna Guest House, I will delete your photos and videos."
Upon him saying so, when he called her to meet at Majra
Krishna hotel, at that time also he forcibly had physical
relations with her and did not delete her photos and videos,
and threatened her saying, "come whenever and wherever I
call you to meet, otherwise, he will make the video viral and
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3654/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2026
undefined
destroy your reputation."
5.5. It is further alleged that, being very scared about four
months ago, when the Applicant called her two or three times
to meet on the terrace of the Gopinath complex in the Prantij
market, she went to meet him. At that time, the Applicant had
physical relations with her.
5.6 After that, on the previous date of 01.01.2026, she came
to know that the Applicant had made viral the videos of the
forced physical relations he had with her on the terrace of the
Prantij Gopinath Complex. Upon learning this, she asked the
Applicant why, even though she had come to meet him
whenever he called, he had made her videos viral.
5.7 Upon saying this, he told her, "I have to make you my
mistress, and I will now bring you to such a state that neither
your family nor your paternal family will keep you; I will keep
you as my mistress for the rest of your life." After that, when
her husband came to know about the explicit videos, her
husband told her to go to Rahul's house.
5.8. On the date of 12.01.2026, at about 2:30 in the
afternoon, when she went to Rahul's house, the family
members of the Applicant had an argument with her.
Consequently, she filed a complaint along with Pravinbhai
Bhaktibhai Patel of her society and Rahul Kirtibhai Patel. The
complaint states that while she was going to bathe and change
clothes at her home, the Applicant recorded explicit videos and
photos on his mobile. He told her that if she wanted the photos
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3654/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2026
undefined
and videos deleted, she must have physical relations with him.
He called her to various places where he repeatedly forced
physical relations and raped her. Furthermore, he made her
photos and videos viral; thus, she lodged the FIR.
5.9. However, even before the complaint was lodged on
15.01.2026 before the Prantij police station, the victim had
preferred an application before the police inspector, Prantij
Police Station which read as under:-
" I am pressing my complaint that Rahul Kirtibhai and I were in
a relationship. We have been together for five years and while
we were having physical relations, someone recorded a video.
My husband saw this video after five months and it was leaked.
Then they told me to leave the house. My reputation in society
was destroyed. Rahul told me that he would take me with him.
Today he took me from my home. There, his family members
misbehaved with me. Then they came with sticks and beat me,
so I have come here to file a police complaint. I want justice.
My husband is not ready to take me back and Rahul should
take me on contract of leaving relationship, this is my request"
5.10 Pursuant thereto, the statement of the Victim was also
recorded on 12.01.2026.
6. 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.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3654/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2026
undefined
6.1 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.
6.2 At the first instance, when a video relating to the intimate
relationship between the Applicant and the victim went viral
through someone, about five months prior to the alleged
incident, and the same was seen by her husband, the victim
was taken to the residence of the present Applicant, wherein
the family members of the Applicant entered into a quarrel
with both the victim and the Applicant, pursuant to which a
chapter case was registered.
6.3 As per the averments made in the earlier application
preferred by the victim before the concerned police station
prior in point of time, it is clearly stated that someone had
made the said video viral; however, the victim has taken a
somersault since her husband came to know about her
relationship with the present Applicant, as a result of which she
was driven out of her house, and the family members of the
Applicant also did not accept her. Therefore, she preferred an
application stating that she wished to live with the present
Applicant in a live-in relationship. Except for this allegation, not
an iota of evidence with regard to the contents of the FIR is
found in the earlier application.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3654/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2026
undefined
6.4 It is further argued that the Applicant and the victim have
been in a consensual relationship for the past five years, which
has been admitted by the victim herself in the application
submitted before the Prantij Police Station prior to the lodging
of the FIR. However, a completely different version has been
stated in the FIR at the behest of Pravinbhai Bhaktibhai,
against whom the father of the Applicant is appearing as an
Advocate.
6.5 It is further submitted that the present FIR is nothing but
an afterthought, and the Applicant has also preferred a
quashing petition, which is presently under consideration.
6.6 It is submitted that the present FIR has been lodged at
the behest of Pravinbhai Bhaktibhai merely because the victim
has not been accepted by her own parents and is also facing
resistance from the family members of the present Applicant.
7. Per contra, learned APP Mr. Pranav Dhagat would submit
that, upon a bare perusal of the FIR, serious allegations are
levelled against the present Applicant, which require custodial
interrogation, particularly when a married woman has
allegedly been exploited by a married man. Even if there exists
a consensual relationship, the serious allegations made in the
FIR require investigation in depth; hence, it is urged that the
application be rejected.
8. 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3654/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2026
undefined
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
consideration:
a) The victim had preferred an application before the Prantij
Police Station prior to lodging of the FIR on 12.03.2026,
pursuant to which her statement was also recorded, which is
diametrically opposed to what has been stated in the FIR.
b) Without discussing the merits of the case, which may
prejudice either side, it prima facie appears that the FIR has
been lodged to protect the reputation of the victim after the
intimate video was made viral by someone. The consensual
relationship between the parties is also surfacing on record.
c) The lodging of the FIR at a belated stage appears to be
an afterthought.
d) 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.
9. Considering the aforesaid aspects and the law laid down
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3654/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2026
undefined
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),
reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Court is inclined to allow the
present application.
10. 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 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;
(e) shall not leave India without the permission of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3654/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2026
undefined
Court and if having passport shall deposit the same
before the trial Court within a week;
(f) 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.
10.1 At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the
prima facie observations made by this Court while considering
the bail application.
11. 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.
12. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct
service is permitted.
(P. M. RAVAL, J)
MMP
