JAYDEEPKUMAR ASHOKBHAI THAKKAR (JAYDIP @JAYESH THAKKAR)versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.MA/15827/2026                                       ORDER DATED: 18/08/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 15827
                           of 2026

==========================================================
                     JAYDEEPKUMAR ASHOKBHAI THAKKAR
                                  Versus
                            STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
DHRUV TOLIYA(9249) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PREMDEEP V JADEJA(13939) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR YUVRAJ BRAHMBHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER

                                 Date : 18/08/2026

                                     ORAL ORDER


1.              By way of this application under Section 482 of

the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( for short,

“BNSS”), the applicant/s has prayed for anticipatory bail in
the event of arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R.
No.11201018260025 of 2026, registered with the CID Cyber

Crime        Police       Station,     Gandhinagar,           for    the      offences

punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2) and 317(4) of the

Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita and Section 66(d) of the Information

Technology Act.



2.      Rule.      Learned      Additional           Public   Prosecutor        waives

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



3.      Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the



                                       Page 1 of 6
      R/CR.MA/15827/2026                                           ORDER DATED: 18/08/2026




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.



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



                                            Page 2 of 6
     R/CR.MA/15827/2026                                             ORDER DATED: 18/08/2026




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

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)      considering the facts of the present case, the role of the

present       applicant     is     of    arranging       the        bank      account         on

commission basis.

b)      at this stage, the prosecution has not been able to show
that prima facie, the present applicant has been in benefit

from the said offence;

c)      moreover,         though        there     is    an     allegation         that        the

applicant was getting commission, but, the prosecution has

not been able to show any money trail which leads to the

present applicant;

d)      the      present         applicant        has        also      cooperated             the

investigation and has remained present on 04.08.2026;

e)      the applicant has no past antecedents;

f)      the learned advocate for the applicant has assured that



                                          Page 3 of 6
      R/CR.MA/15827/2026                                         ORDER DATED: 18/08/2026




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 applicant:



         (a)     shall cooperate with the investigation and make

         available for interrogation whenever required;



         (b)     shall       not     directly        or     indirectly        make     any



                                           Page 4 of 6
R/CR.MA/15827/2026                                          ORDER DATED: 18/08/2026




   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 25.08.2026 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,



                                  Page 5 of 6
       R/CR.MA/15827/2026                                                                ORDER DATED: 18/08/2026




            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.


                                                                                     (SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)
 M.H. DAVE/92


Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: MAHESHKUMAR HASMUKHLAL DAVE(HC00193), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 18/08/2026 17:41:52




                                                         Page 6 of 6