RITIN @ BOBY S/O. DILIPBHAI VENARSEversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.MA/18242/2026                                        ORDER DATED: 18/08/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 18242
                           of 2026

==========================================================
                     RITIN @ BOBY S/O. DILIPBHAI VENARSE
                                    Versus
                              STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
DIGPALSNGH H RATHORE(8083) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR YOGESHKUMAR O RATHOD(10075) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. PUNDREEK B ODEDRA(17308) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR YUVRAJ BRAHMBHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER

                                 Date : 18/08/2026

                                  ORAL ORDER


1.      Leave       to    amend        the     application       as    regards           the

antecedents is granted. Amendment be carried out forthwith.

        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.

11218003260377            of   2026,    registered       with     Bagvadar        Police

Station, District: Porbandar for the offences punishable under

Sections 316(5) and 54 of the BNS.



2.      Rule.         Learned     Additional          Public    Prosecutor        waives

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




                                        Page 1 of 6
      R/CR.MA/18242/2026                                           ORDER DATED: 18/08/2026




3.       Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the

nature of allegations are such that custodial interrogation at

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



                                            Page 2 of 6
      R/CR.MA/18242/2026                                             ORDER DATED: 18/08/2026




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)       the role attributed to the present applicant was to

assist the complainant to get Visa; even as per the facts

stated by the complainant, the complaint was filed at the
stage wherein the interview had been taken for the purpose

of the Visa;

b)       learned       advocate         for     the     complainant        has     filed       the

affidavit       of    the     complainant,            which     is   taken       on    record,

wherein it has been stated that the dispute between the

parties had been settled and the entire dispute is resolved;

c)       the offences are not punishable with life imprisonment;

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



                                              Page 3 of 6
     R/CR.MA/18242/2026                                     ORDER DATED: 18/08/2026




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 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/18242/2026                                          ORDER DATED: 18/08/2026




         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 25.08.2026 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/18242/2026                                                                   ORDER DATED: 18/08/2026




   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 applicant who is 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 18/08/2026 17:52:38




                                                             Page 6 of 6