KIRANKUMAR HIRALAL PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.MA/8990/2026                                    ORDER DATED: 20/04/2026




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 8990
                          of 2026

==========================================================
                         KIRANKUMAR HIRALAL PATEL
                                   Versus
                             STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. PREM K. SHAH(18380) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
KRUTIK A PARIKH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL

                                Date : 20/04/2026

                                 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     FIR    being       C.R.         No.
11210023230223/2023, registered with Khatodara                                Police
Station, District: Surat for the offences punishable under
Sections 409, 420, 506(2) 504 and 120-B of the IPC.


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/8990/2026                              ORDER DATED: 20/04/2026




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 granting bail
an elaborate examination of evidence and detailed reasons


                                  Page 2 of 5
     R/CR.MA/8990/2026                             ORDER DATED: 20/04/2026




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)    From the impugned order dated 13.11.2025 passed by the
learned Sessions Judge, it transpires that no case under Section
409 of the IPC is made out; however, the maximum punishment
prescribed under Section 420 of the IPC is seven years. Upon
perusal of the judgments rendered in CC No. 102824/2023 and
CC No. 60599/2023, it emerges that the co-accused have been
acquitted.

B)    A plain reading of the FIR further indicates that the person
handling the day-to-day business operations of Chitrakut Impex
is one Rohit Dineshbhai Patel, and acquittal is recorded in
Criminal Case No. 102824/2023 dated 29.09.2025 by the
learned 13th Additional Senior Civil Judge and ACJM, Surat.


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.




                             Page 3 of 5
     R/CR.MA/8990/2026                        ORDER DATED: 20/04/2026




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
       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 27.04.2026 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


                              Page 4 of 5
         R/CR.MA/8990/2026                                                      ORDER DATED: 20/04/2026




             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)
   MOHD SAIF ULLAH




Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: MOHD SAIF ULLAH(HC02372), ENGLISH STENO GRADE-II\, at High Court of Gujarat on 20/04/2026 17:48:26




                                                     Page 5 of 5