VAJASEEBHAI RAMASEEBHAI CHAVDAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.MA/14918/2026                                          ORDER DATED: 03/07/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 14918
                           of 2026

==========================================================
                     VAJASEEBHAI RAMASEEBHAI CHAVDA
                                  Versus
                            STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BHARGAV P DANGAR(10685) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RONAK RAWAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER

                                    Date : 03/07/2026

                                     ORAL ORDER


1.      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.11185004261063              of     2026,      registered        with       the     Jam

Khambhaliya Police Station, District : Devbhoomi Dwarka for

the offences punishable under Sections 108 and 116(b) of the

Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (‘the BNS’ for short).



2.      Rule.      Learned      Additional            Public     Prosecutor         waives

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



3.      Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the

nature of allegations are such that custodial interrogation at



                                        Page 1 of 6
      R/CR.MA/14918/2026                                           ORDER DATED: 03/07/2026




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.



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 undergone



                                            Page 2 of 6
      R/CR.MA/14918/2026                                       ORDER DATED: 03/07/2026




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)       the role attributed to the present applicant is of not

paying the legal dues of the present applicant;

b)       though in the suicide note, the name of the present

applicant has been stated by the deceased, but the fact

remains        that        the    present     applicant,    from    the    FIR     itself
suggests that, the deceased had to pay the amount to other

family members;

c)       the investigating authority has also not been able to

produce any document to show that there was any legal due

amount           that was to be paid by the applicant to the

deceased;

d)       the applicant has no past antecedents;

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.



                                            Page 3 of 6
     R/CR.MA/14918/2026                                     ORDER DATED: 03/07/2026




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 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



                                      Page 4 of 6
R/CR.MA/14918/2026                                          ORDER DATED: 03/07/2026




   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 10.07.2026 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



                                  Page 5 of 6
      R/CR.MA/14918/2026                                                                ORDER DATED: 03/07/2026




           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.


                                                                                    (SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)
M.H. DAVE/44


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 03/07/2026 15:39:20




                                                        Page 6 of 6