Tuesday, 19, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Khodabhai Raghavbhai Makwana vs State Of Gujarat
2026 Latest Caselaw 1671 Guj

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1671 Guj
Judgement Date : 25 March, 2026

[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Khodabhai Raghavbhai Makwana vs State Of Gujarat on 25 March, 2026

                                                                                                           NEUTRAL CITATION




                           R/CR.MA/7051/2026                                 ORDER DATED: 25/03/2026

                                                                                                           undefined




                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                      R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 7051
                                                of 2026

                     ==========================================================
                                       KHODABHAI RAGHAVBHAI MAKWANA & ORS.
                                                      Versus
                                                STATE OF GUJARAT
                     ==========================================================
                     Appearance:
                     MR NIRAJGIRI M GAUSWAMI(13675) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
                     MR NISHITH P THAKKAR(2836) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6
                     MR. YUVRAJ BRAHMBHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
                     ==========================================================

                        CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL

                                                         Date : 25/03/2026

                                                           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 applicants have prayed for anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11211031260059 of 2026, registered with Limbdi Police Station, District: Surendranagar for the offences alleged therein.

3. Learned advocate for the applicants submits that the nature of allegations are such that custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. It is further submitted that the applicants will keep themselves available during the course of investigation and trial also

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7051/2026 ORDER DATED: 25/03/2026

undefined

and will not flee from justice.

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

4. 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.

5. 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

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7051/2026 ORDER DATED: 25/03/2026

undefined

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 allegations in the FIR reveals to allege offence of abortion for which there is no material on record nor complainant has given any document to the effect that abortion was carried out. Allegations are vague in nature. No specific allegations of physical or mental cruelty are stated in the FIR. The report of the support center speaks that the parties have gathered for compromise pursuant to the application given by the Anitaben dated 23.12.2025, and before that FIR was came to be lodged by the present applicant No.3 Madhuben Khodabhai Makwana with regards to scuffle pursuant to the talks of settlement between the parties. It transpires that the entire family has been dragged into the alleged offence which is punishable under Sections 498 of the IPC (Section 85 of the BNS), however no evidence worth name is placed on record as far as Section 313 of the IPC (Section 89 of the BNS) is concerned.

b) the applicants have no past antecedents;

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

6. 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

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7051/2026 ORDER DATED: 25/03/2026

undefined

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.

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

(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 07.04.2026 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;

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7051/2026 ORDER DATED: 25/03/2026

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) 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.

7.1 At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court while considering the bail application.

8. 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 applicants who are granted pre-arrest bail.

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

(P. M. RAVAL, J) NITIN MAKWANA

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter