AMMAR AKHTARHUSEN MANKIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.MA/851/2026                               ORDER DATED: 11/03/2026




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 851
                           of 2026

==========================================================
                        AMMAR AKHTARHUSEN MANKI
                                 Versus
                           STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. ALTAF Y CHARKHA(7271) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL

                             Date : 11/03/2026

                              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 FIR being C.R. No. 11197025251060 of 2025, registered
with Karjan Police Station, District : Vadodara for the offences
alleged therein.


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.

                                 Page 1 of 5
      R/CR.MA/851/2026                           ORDER DATED: 11/03/2026




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 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



                                Page 2 of 5
     R/CR.MA/851/2026                              ORDER DATED: 11/03/2026




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, following aspects
have been taken into consideration:

a)    on 29.11.2021, the then Taluka Development Officer had
approved the expenses of transportation in favour of Dhananjay
Construction Company, despite of breach of conditions of the online
tender, however, the present applicant as per the affidavit filed by
the investigating officer before the Sessions Court has join as a
technical assistant through outsource on 08.02.2022 and performed
duty till 11.10.2022, in view of the same, the present applicant was
not working when the tender was awarded;

b)     the applicant has no past antecedents;

c)    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.

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



                                 Page 3 of 5
    R/CR.MA/851/2026                             ORDER DATED: 11/03/2026




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 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
      18.03.2026 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. and the
      Investigating Officer shall ensure that no unnecessary
      harassment or inconvenience is caused to the applicant;

      (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


                               Page 4 of 5
        R/CR.MA/851/2026                                                              ORDER DATED: 11/03/2026




           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
applicant who is granted pre-arrest bail.


9.         Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
permitted.



                                                                                                (P. M. RAVAL, J)
NITIN MAKWANA
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: NITIN INDRAVADAN MAKWANA(HCW0110), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE I, at High Court of Gujarat on 11/03/2026 14:57:41




                                                       Page 5 of 5