MESARIYA @PARMAR USHABEN GANPATBHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

      R/CR.MA/10257/2026                          ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026




      IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD


     R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY
                  BAIL) NO. 10257 of 2026

================================================
      MESARIYA @PARMAR USHABEN GANPATBHAI
                       Versus
                 STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================
Appearance:
MR PRABHAKAR UPADYAY(1060) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR BHARGAV PANDYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL

                            Date : 01/05/2026

                            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 applicant
has prayed for anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in connection
with the FIR being C.R. No. 11191045260203 of 2026, registered
with Sola High Court Police Station, District: Ahmedabad City for
the offences punishable under Sections 108 and 54 of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).



                                 Page 1 of 5
      R/CR.MA/10257/2026                           ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026




3.       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
herself available during the course of investigation and trial also
and will not flee from justice.


3.1      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.


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


                                  Page 2 of 5
     R/CR.MA/10257/2026                            ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026




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 applicant is a lady who happens to be the sister-in-
        law (Sali) of the deceased;

        b)     it appears that there are two incidents recorded, one is
        of 19.03.2026 which alleges that she raised finger about
        character of the deceased and rushed to his residence and
        gave exaggerated version that what actually was and
        thereby, created trouble in their life. Except that, there prima
        facie appears no allegation against the present applicant;

        c)      another incident is of 2022;

        d)   prima facie it appears that ingredients of offence
        punishable under Sections 108 r/w. 54 of the Bharatiya
        Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) are not fulfilled;

        e)    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.


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

                                   Page 3 of 5
     R/CR.MA/10257/2026                           ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026




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.


7.      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 remain present at the concerned Police Station on
        05.05.2026 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


                                Page 4 of 5
         R/CR.MA/10257/2026                                                             ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026




             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) 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
   applicant who is granted pre-arrest bail.


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


                                                                                             [ P. M. Raval, J. ]
   hiren/3tss1526




Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: HIREN VIRENDRABHAI MER(HC00351), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 01/05/2026 13:54:21



                                                         Page 5 of 5