NARESHBHAI GUNWANTBHAI MAKWANA(DEV PATEL)versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.MA/23808/2025                                     ORDER DATED: 27/04/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 23808
                           of 2025

==========================================================
            NARESHBHAI GUNWANTBHAI MAKWANA(DEV PATEL)
                               Versus
                         STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PARTHIV A BHATT(5331) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS DIVYANGNA JHALA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER

                                 Date : 27/04/2026

                                  ORAL ORDER


1. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service

of notice of rule for respondent – State of Gujarat.



2. 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 Complaint No.2583 of

2025      filed    on     16.08.2025,      registered   with      Kamrej       Police

Station, Surat.



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



                                        Page 1 of 5
   R/CR.MA/23808/2025                                           ORDER DATED: 27/04/2026




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

imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any

cognizable offence; (iii) the possibility of the applicant to flee



                                         Page 2 of 5
     R/CR.MA/23808/2025                                            ORDER DATED: 27/04/2026




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.


5.1.    Considering the fact that learned APP has shown from

the police papers that the complainant is now, not interested
in persuading the matter further, this Court is inclined to

grant this application for anticipatory bail.



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



                                          Page 3 of 5
   R/CR.MA/23808/2025                                 ORDER DATED: 27/04/2026




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 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 06.05.2026 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;




                                  Page 4 of 5
         R/CR.MA/23808/2025                                                                  ORDER DATED: 27/04/2026




             (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 this 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.

                         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 27/04/2026 17:02:34




                                                            Page 5 of 5