Created byFuzzy Cloud

High Court of Gujarat

CHIRAG JITENDRAKUMAR AGRAWALversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

Disposal
58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH

Holding

The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, finding no justification to deny pre‑arrest bail.

Summary

The accused, Chirag Jitendrakumar Agrawal, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the B.N.S. in connection with an FIR alleging offences under Sections 316(2), 316(5), 318(4) and 54, relating to a commercial transaction of Rs.74,88,746. The applicant claimed false implication, no prior similar offences, and that custodial interrogation was unnecessary. The State opposed, arguing the allegations were serious and interrogation essential. The Court examined the material, noted that the prosecution had not shown a need for custodial interrogation and that the case was essentially a civil recovery matter. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail, ordering the applicant to execute a personal bond of Rs.10,000 with one surety and to comply with several conditions, including cooperation with investigation and residence restrictions.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482 of the B.N.S. for the offences alleged in the FIR.
  • Whether custodial interrogation is essential for the investigation of the alleged offences.
  • Whether the prosecution has demonstrated a necessity to deny bail in the present circumstances.

Subjects

anticipatory bailSection 482custodial interrogationbond conditionsGujarat High Courtfalse implicationcommercial transaction

Judgment

        R/CR.MA/12357/2026                           ORDER DATED: 02/06/2026




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

   R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY
                BAIL) NO. 12357 of 2026
=========================================
            CHIRAG JITENDRAKUMAR AGRAWAL
                           Versus
                   STATE OF GUJARAT
=========================================
Appearance:
JAYDEEP H SINDHI(9585) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR NIRAJ SHARMA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=========================================
 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA

                              Date : 02/06/2026

                                ORAL ORDER


(i)            Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on
           behalf of respondent-State.


(ii)           By way of the present application under Section 482 of the
           BNSS, the applicant-accused has prayed for anticipatory bail
           in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11216022260224
           of 2026 registered with Kalol Taluka Police Station, District:
           Gandhinagar for the offences under Sections 316(2), 316(5),
           318(4) and 54 of the B.N.S.


(iii)          Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the
           applicant has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence.
           He has no past antecedents of like nature and custodial
           interrogation of the applicant is not essential for the purpose
           of investigation. Lastly he has submitted that the criminal
           proceedings has not initiated to recover the due amount of
           self transaction and nothing else.




                                    Page 1 of 4
       R/CR.MA/12357/2026                                    ORDER DATED: 02/06/2026




(iv)            Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf
          of the respondent – State has opposed grant of anticipatory
          bail stating inter alia that the allegations against the
          applicant are grave and serious in nature and custodial
          interrogation is necessary for further investigation of the
          case.


(v)             Having heard the learned advocates for the respective
          parties and perusing the material placed on record and
          taking into consideration the facts of the case, it appears that
          the applicant Chirag Agrawal has been arranged as accused
          no. 3 in the FIR. And as per the allegations made against him,
          he had purchased clothes from the complainant in the year of
          2024       worth       amounting      to    Rs.74,88,746/-.      In     such
          circumstances, it appears that the criminal proceedings has
          not been initiated so as to recover the amount of business
          transaction. The prosecution has failed to demonstrate that
          the custodial interrogation of the applicant is essential.




(vi)            Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and
          the role attributed to the present applicant in the alleged
          offence, I find no reason to decline pre-arrest bail to the
          applicant. In the result, the present application is allowed.
          The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the event of
          his    arrest     in   connection    with    a   FIR   being     C.R.        No.
          11216022260224 of 2026 registered with Kalol Taluka Police
          Station, District: Gandhinagar on his executing a personal
          bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one
          surety of like amount on the following conditions:




                                        Page 2 of 4
     R/CR.MA/12357/2026                               ORDER DATED: 02/06/2026




        (a)     shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself
                available for interrogation whenever required;


        (b)     shall remain present at concerned Police Station on
                11/06/2026 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;


        (c)     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;


        (d)     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;


        (e)     shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the
                address to the investigating officer and the court
                concerned and shall not change his residence till the
                final disposal of the case till further orders;


        (f)     shall not leave India without the permission of the Trial
                Court and if having passport shall deposit the same
                before the Trial Court within a week; and




8.      At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the
        prima facie observations made by this Court in the present
        order.


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



                                   Page 3 of 4
     R/CR.MA/12357/2026                                                                       ORDER DATED: 02/06/2026




          is permitted.


                                                                                               (ILESH J. VORA,J)
Kaushal Rathod
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: KAUSHAL MAHESHBHAI RATHOD(HCD0078), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE TWO CLASS TWO, at High Court of Gujarat on 02/06/2026 13:32:54




                                                           Page 4 of 4


Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "anticipatory bail"Sign in to search

For a digitally signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's own website. Only the court can issue one.