SAURABH SATYENDRASINGH RAJPUTversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.MA/16360/2026                                       ORDER DATED: 10/08/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE ANTICIPATORY
                   BAIL) NO. 16360 of 2026

==========================================================
                      SAURABH SATYENDRASINGH RAJPUT
                                  Versus
                            STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
BHAVIN B THAKAR(9371) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HEMANT B RAVAL(3491) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR. NIRAJ SHARMA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER

                                Date : 10/08/2026

                                  ORAL ORDER


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

Bharatiya         Nagarik      Suraksha         Sanhita,      2023      (for     short,
“BNSS”), the applicant has prayed for anticipatory bail in the
event of arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.

11191047260009            of   2026,     registered       with      Mahila       Police

Station       (East),      District:     Ahmedabad            for    the       offences

punishable under Sections 69 of the BNS, 2023.

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

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



                                       Page 1 of 5
      R/CR.MA/16360/2026                                           ORDER DATED: 10/08/2026




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 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



                                            Page 2 of 5
      R/CR.MA/16360/2026                                        ORDER DATED: 10/08/2026




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)       the     present          applicant      and     the   complainant       had       a

consensual relationship.


b)         although, the present complainant is 23 years old and

the applicant is 29 years old,                         the fact remains that they

were in relationship for two and half years.


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/16360/2026                                          ORDER DATED: 10/08/2026




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 17.08.2026, 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




                                       Page 4 of 5
         R/CR.MA/16360/2026                                                    ORDER DATED: 10/08/2026




            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.

   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)
   ADITYA SINGH/56

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ADITYA SINGH(HC02376), ENGLISH STENO GRADE-II\, at High Court of Gujarat on 10/08/2026 17:41:48



                                                   Page 5 of 5