VINODBHAI MITHALAL DAVEversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.MA/16434/2026                                        ORDER DATED: 17/07/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 16434
                           of 2026
                             With
         R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 16438 of 2026
                             With
         R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 16516 of 2026
==========================================================
              JAYANTIBHAI PARSOTTAMBHAI BABARIYA & ORS.
                                 Versus
                           STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MITESH AMIN, SENIOR ADVOCATE with MR BN LIMBACHIA &
MR NISHITH K JOSHI, ADVOCATES for the Applicants
MR YUVRAJ BRAHMBHATT, APP for the Respondent - State
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER

                                   Date : 17/07/2026

                                    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.11191011250425 of 2025, registered with the D.C.B. Police

Station, Ahmedabad City, for the offences punishable under

Sections 314, 316(2), 316(4), 318(4), 321, 336(3), 336(4), 338,

340(2) and 344 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (‘the BNS’ for

short)     and      Sections   5     and    33(3)      of     the   Gujarat       Money

Lenders 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/16434/2026                                           ORDER DATED: 17/07/2026




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



                                            Page 2 of 6
     R/CR.MA/16434/2026                                     ORDER DATED: 17/07/2026




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 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 complainant had earlier filed a complaint before the

Krushnanagar Police Station, Ahmedabad on 07.10.2023 and
after taking into consideration the allegations as well as the

various statements, a closure report was submitted by the

police stating that no offence can be registered in view of the

fact that the dispute is between the partners with respect to

the account of the partnership firm viz., Gopinath Pride;

b)      the     partners   of   the     said        partnership   firm     are        the

complainant and accused No.1 - Mithabhai;

c)      the allegations made in the present FIR also the same

which was the subject matter of the complaint that was filed

before the Krushnanagar Police Station;



                                      Page 3 of 6
      R/CR.MA/16434/2026                                              ORDER DATED: 17/07/2026




d)       the income tax returns and the books of account i.e.

profit and loss account, balance-sheet, etc., which are signed

by the present complainant;

e)       the applicants have no past antecedents;

f)       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 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:



                                             Page 4 of 6
R/CR.MA/16434/2026                                           ORDER DATED: 17/07/2026




   (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 24.07.2026 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;



                                   Page 5 of 6
       R/CR.MA/16434/2026                                                                ORDER DATED: 17/07/2026




           (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 in all the

applications. Direct service is permitted.


                                                                                     (SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)
M.H. DAVE/50,53,SB-I/4


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 17/07/2026 14:23:38




                                                         Page 6 of 6