POPATBHAI DEVABHAI BOLIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.MA/16943/2026                                    ORDER DATED: 30/07/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 16943
                           of 2026

==========================================================
                      POPATBHAI DEVABHAI BOLIYA & ANR.
                                   Versus
                            STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
DAKWALA JAY S(13856) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
TATVDEEP J JANI(7227) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR RONAK RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER

                                Date : 30/07/2026

                                 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.11198059260141 of 2026, registered with Umrala Police

Station, District, Bhavnagar for the offences punishable under

Sections 115(2), 109(1), 351(2) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyay

Sanhita, 2023.



2.      Rule.         Learned   Additional        Public   Prosecutor         waives

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



3.      Learned advocate for the applicants submits that the

nature of allegations are such that custodial interrogation at



                                    Page 1 of 6
      R/CR.MA/16943/2026                                           ORDER DATED: 30/07/2026




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

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/16943/2026                                       ORDER DATED: 30/07/2026




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)       considering the role attributed to that the applicant no.1

is stated to have assaulted by fist and blow; even in the

FIR, there are no allegations that the applicant no.1 has

grievously injured the complainant and/or the family members

of the complainant;
b) the role attributed to the applicant no.2 is that she was

carrying a dhariya (weapon) but has not inflicted any injury

to     the     complainant        and/or       the    family    members         of       the

complainant;

c) the role attributed to the applicants is that they were

present when the alleged offence has taken place.

d)       the applicants have no past antecedents;

e)       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.



                                        Page 3 of 6
     R/CR.MA/16943/2026                                          ORDER DATED: 30/07/2026




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 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



                                       Page 4 of 6
R/CR.MA/16943/2026                                          ORDER DATED: 30/07/2026




   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 06.08.2026 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.



                                  Page 5 of 6
        R/CR.MA/16943/2026                                                                   ORDER DATED: 30/07/2026




  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.                                                             Direct

  service is permitted.


                                                                                         (SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)
  SRILATHA



Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: SRILATHA VENKATARAO UPADHYAYULA(HC00185), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 30/07/2026 15:23:39




                                                            Page 6 of 6