TURK TANJIL ASGARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.MA/14301/2026                                            ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 14301
                           of 2026

==========================================================
                            TURK TANJIL ASGAR & ANR.
                                     Versus
                               STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ASHISH M DAGLI(2203) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR NIRAJ SHARMA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER

                                     Date : 17/08/2026

                                      ORAL ORDER


1.      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.11205032251290             of     2025,       registered        with     the       Mundra
Police     Station,       District     :    Kachchh         –     West    Bhuj        for    the

offences      punishable       under         Sections       109(1),       115(2),      118(1),

189(4), 190, 191(3), 351(3), 296(b) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya

Nyay Sanhita (‘the BNS’ for short) and Section 135 of the

Gujarat Police Act.



2.      Rule.      Learned         Additional            Public    Prosecutor          waives

service of notice of rule for respondent – State of Gujarat.




                                           Page 1 of 6
      R/CR.MA/14301/2026                                           ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026




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 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



                                            Page 2 of 6
      R/CR.MA/14301/2026                                               ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026




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, prima facie,

following aspects have been taken into consideration:

a)       considering the role attributed to the present applicants,

learned       APP          has     stated    that     in        the    CCTV        footage,      the

presence        of    the        applicant     No.2        is    not    shown;        and     that

applicant No.1 was not carrying weapon;
b)       the applicants are not named in the FIR;

c)       the applicants have no past antecedents;

d)       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



                                             Page 3 of 6
     R/CR.MA/14301/2026                                        ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026




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 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



                                       Page 4 of 6
      R/CR.MA/14301/2026                                         ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026




         collected or yet to be collected by the police;



         (d)     shall      remain    present        at    the       concerned      Police

         Station on 24.08.2026 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;



         (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.



                                       Page 5 of 6
       R/CR.MA/14301/2026                                                                ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026




 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.


                                                                                     (SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)
 M.H. DAVE/57


Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: MAHESHKUMAR HASMUKHLAL DAVE(HC00193), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 17/08/2026 15:12:12




                                                         Page 6 of 6