BABUBHAI DEVKARANBHAI NOGOS (RABARI)versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.MA/15091/2026                                     ORDER DATED: 06/07/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 15091
                           of 2026

==========================================================
            BABUBHAI DEVKARANBHAI NOGOS (RABARI) & ANR.
                               Versus
                         STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR N R DESAI(6504) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR TIRTHRAJ PANDYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER

                                Date : 06/07/2026

                                 ORAL ORDER


1.      By way of this application under Section 482 of the

Bharatiya         Nagarik   Suraksha         Sanhita,       2023       ( for   short,
“BNSS”), the applicants have prayed for anticipatory bail in
the event of arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R.

No.11195061260467 of 2026, registered with Dantiwada Police

Station,      District:   Banaskantha       for    the     offences     punishable

under Sections 111(2)(b), 318(4) and 54 of the Bhartiya Nyay

Sanhita.



2.      Rule.         Learned   Additional        Public    Prosecutor         waives

service of notice of rule for respondent – State of Gujarat.



3.      Learned advocate for the applicants submits that the

nature of allegations are such that custodial interrogation at



                                    Page 1 of 6
      R/CR.MA/15091/2026                                           ORDER DATED: 06/07/2026




this stage is not necessary. It is further submitted that the

applicants will keep themselves available during the course of

investigation and trial also and will not flee from justice.



3.1      The learned advocate for the applicants further states

that the applicants shall abide by all the conditions that may

be imposed while granting anticipatory bail to the applicants.

Accordingly, it is urged that this application may be allowed

and to grant the anticipatory bail to the applicants.



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



                                            Page 2 of 6
      R/CR.MA/15091/2026                                            ORDER DATED: 06/07/2026




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, prima facie,

following aspects have been taken into consideration:



a)       that the present applicants are not the owner of the

property;

b) the role played by the present applicants is only of broker

and      the     complainant,       in     the     FIR,       has     stated      that        the

applicants were to get 2% towards commission on the said
transaction;

c)       the learned advocate for the applicants has assured that

the     applicants         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



                                          Page 3 of 6
     R/CR.MA/15091/2026                                        ORDER DATED: 06/07/2026




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 applicants in

connection with the above-referred FIR, the applicants shall

be    released       on    bail   on    furnishing         a   personal        bond      of

Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with one surety of

like amount each on the following conditions that applicants:



        (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;



                                       Page 4 of 6
      R/CR.MA/15091/2026                                         ORDER DATED: 06/07/2026




         (d)     shall      remain    present        at    the       concerned      Police

         Station on 13.07.2026 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 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/15091/2026                                                 ORDER DATED: 06/07/2026




            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 applicants who are granted pre-arrest

            bail.



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

            service is permitted.


                                                                                  (SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)
            URIL RANA




Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: RANA URIL K(HC01406), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 06/07/2026 15:22:31




                                                          Page 6 of 6