MANTHAN PARESHKUMAR PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.MA/11823/2026                             ORDER DATED: 19/05/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 11823
                           of 2026

================================================================
                          MANTHAN PARESHKUMAR PATEL
                                     Versus
                               STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Appearance:
MR KISHAN R CHAKWAWALA(9846) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RM CHAKWAWALA(1519) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI

                                Date : 19/05/2026

                                 ORAL ORDER

1.      Registry is directed to accept the Vakalatnama of learned
        advocate Mr. Dhaval J. Makwana on behalf of the original
        complainant.


2.      RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service
        of Rule on behalf of the respondent - State of Gujarat and
        learned advocate Mr. Dhaval J. Makwana waives service of
        Rule on behalf of the original complainant.


3.      Heard learned advocate Mr. Chakwawala for the applicant,
        learned APP Mr. Jayswal for the respondent – State and
        learned advocate Mr. Makwana for the original complainant.


4.      By way of the present application under Section 482 of the
        Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’),
        the applicant - accused has prayed for anticipatory bail in
        connection with the FIR bearing No.11191017260017 of
        2026 registered with Gujarat University Police Station,


                                    Page 1 of 5
     R/CR.MA/11823/2026                              ORDER DATED: 19/05/2026




        Ahmedabad City for the offences punishable under Sections
        316(4), 318(3) and 54 etc. of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita,
        2023.


5.      Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the nature of
        allegations are such for which custodial interrogation at this
        stage is not necessary. He further submits that the applicant
        will keep himself available during the course of investigation,
        trial also and will not flee from justice.


6.      Learned advocate for the applicant on instructions states that
        the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the
        conditions including imposition of conditions with regard to
        powers of Investigating Agency to file an application before
        the competent Court for his remand. He further submit that
        upon filing of such application by the Investigating Agency,
        the right of applicant accused to oppose such application on
        merits may be kept open. Learned advocate, therefore,
        submitted that considering the above facts, the applicant may
        be granted anticipatory bail.


7.      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.


8.      At the outset, it was stated by the learned advocate Mr.
        Makwana appearing for the original complainant that the
        dispute is amicably settled between the parties and he places
        on record the affidavit on behalf of the original first
        informant stating that the issue has been mutually settled
        between the parties and he has consented that he does not



                                  Page 2 of 5
      R/CR.MA/11823/2026                              ORDER DATED: 19/05/2026




         have any objection if the present application for anticipatory
         bail is allowed. The affidavit is ordered to be taken on record.


9.       Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and
         perusing the material placed on record and taking into
         consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations,
         gravity of offences, role attributed to the accused, without
         discussing the evidence in detail, at this stage, I am inclined
         to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.


10.      This Court has considered following aspects,

         (i)     the complainant Mr. Hemendrasinh Dilipsinh Solanki is
                 present before the Court and he is identified by the
                 learned advocate Mr. Makwana;

         (ii)    Upon Court’s query, Mr. Hemendrasinh Dilipsinh
                 Solanki, original complainant, has stated before this
                 Court that he does not have any objection if the present
                 applicant is enlarged on anticipatory bail as the dispute
                 is amicably settled between the parties;

         (iii)   the dispute between the parties is of commercial nature
                 and hence, both the advocates Mr. Chakwawala and
                 Mr. Makwana state that the dispute is of commercial
                 nature which is a civil dispute and therefore, when the
                 parties have settled the dispute amicably, the present
                 applicant is required to be enlarged on anticipatory
                 bail;

         (iv)    Prima-facie, it seems to be civil dispute.


11.      In the facts and circumstances of the present case, since the
         custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required, I am
         inclined to consider the case of the applicant.


12.      This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid
         down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam


                                    Page 3 of 5
      R/CR.MA/11823/2026                                 ORDER DATED: 19/05/2026




         Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.,
         reported at [2011] 1 SCC 694, wherein the Hon’ble Apex
         Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitution Bench
         in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. Vs.
         State of Punjab, reported at (1980) 2 SCC 565.


13.      In the result, the present application is allowed. The
         applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his
         arrest in connection with FIR No.11191017260017 of 2026
         registered        with    Gujarat     University   Police       Station,
         Ahmedabad          City    on   executing   a   personal       bond       of
         Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety
         each of like amount on the following conditions:


         (a)     shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself
                 available for interrogation whenever required;

         (b)     shall remain present at concerned Police Station on
                 25.05.2026 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;

         (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 residence till the final
                 disposal of the case till further orders;

         (f)     shall not leave India without the permission of the
                 concerned trial court and if having passport shall
                 deposit the same before the concerned trial court
                 within a week; and

         (g)     it would be open to the Investigating Officer to file an


                                      Page 4 of 5
        R/CR.MA/11823/2026                                                       ORDER DATED: 19/05/2026




                    application for remand if he considers it proper and just
                    and the learned Magistrate would decide it on merits;

14.        At the trial, the concerned trial court shall not be influenced
           by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the
           present order.


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


                                                                                   (NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)

Dolly




Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: DOLLYBEN CHETANBHAI VADUKAR(HC01392), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 19/05/2026 12:42:41


                                                   Page 5 of 5