RAJUBEN RAMESHBHAI VADHER (MAYATRA)versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

      R/CR.MA/10734/2026                          ORDER DATED: 06/05/2026




      IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD


     R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY
                  BAIL) NO. 10734 of 2026

================================================
      RAJUBEN RAMESHBHAI VADHER (MAYATRA)
                       Versus
                 STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================
Appearance:
MR HB CHAMPAVAT(6149) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR CHINTAN DAVE, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL

                            Date : 06/05/2026

                            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. 11198002260141 of 2026, registered
with Alang Police Station, District: Bhavnagar for the offences
punishable under Sections 108, 80(2), and 54 of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition
Act.

                                 Page 1 of 6
      R/CR.MA/10734/2026                           ORDER DATED: 06/05/2026




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
herself 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 gravity of the accusation; (ii) the antecedents of the
applicant including the fact as to whether he has previously


                                  Page 2 of 6
   R/CR.MA/10734/2026                            ORDER DATED: 06/05/2026




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, following aspects have been taken into
consideration:


      a)    the applicant is a lady aged 56 years and residing at
      Surat as well as Manar, Bhavnagar;

      b)   as per the investigation papers, it would appear that
      the deceased was working at PHC, Kachchh from 2019 to
      2021 and from 2021 till death, she was working at Timba,
      Bhavnagar;

      c)     it appears that the deceased and her husband had a
      love affair and it was a love marriage and hence, there prima
      facie appears to be no question of demand of any dowry;

      d)    ingredients of offence alleged against the present
      applicant prima facie appears to be not satisfied inasmuch as
      marriage span is more than 7 years. It also prima facie
      appears that there is no instigation soon before the death of
      the deceased;

      e)    all co-accused, except husband of the deceased, are all
      stated to have been granted bail;

      f)   this Court cannot ignore the growing tendency to
      implicate all elderly family members in matrimonial
      disputes through 'omnibus' (generalized) allegations. Sans


                               Page 3 of 6
     R/CR.MA/10734/2026                           ORDER DATED: 06/05/2026




        there being any overt act attributed to the applicant in the
        complaint, the custodial interrogation of the applicant, an
        elderly lady, does not appear to be warranted for the
        purpose of further investigation;

        g)    the Court would be loath in granting anticipatory bail
        in a case of suicide out of matrimonial dispute, however, in
        the facts and circumstances of the case, to protect the
        personal liberty of the applicant against potentially
        unfounded incarceration, this Court is inclined to grant the
        benefit of anticipatory bail;

        h)    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 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


                                Page 4 of 6
      R/CR.MA/10734/2026                          ORDER DATED: 06/05/2026




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 as
         and when called for;

         (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/10734/2026                                                             ORDER DATED: 06/05/2026




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.


                                                                                          [ P. M. Raval, J. ]
hiren/24tss6526




 Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
 Digitally signed by: HIREN VIRENDRABHAI MER(HC00351), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 06/05/2026 17:12:55




                                                     Page 6 of 6