SANJEEVKUMAR C, S/O LATE K. NARAYANAN NAIRversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 35-ANY OTHER MODE @ ADM.STAGE
- Bench
- P M RAVAL
Holding
The Court declined to grant immediate anticipatory bail but imposed conditions requiring the applicants to cooperate with the investigation and mandating procedural safeguards, including a seven‑day notice before any arrest.
Summary
The applicants filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking protection against arrest in connection with an FIR alleging offences under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. They contended that the maximum punishment for the alleged offences is seven years and expressed readiness to cooperate with the investigation. The Court, invoking Supreme Court precedents (Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, and Md. Asfak Alam v. State of Jharkhand), ordered the applicants to appear before the investigating officer by 23‑03‑2026 and to cooperate fully. It further directed that any arrest must be preceded by a seven‑day notice and must adhere to the procedural safeguards laid down by the Supreme Court, including informing the magistrate of the grounds of arrest. With these conditions, the application was disposed of.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate exercise of power under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 in granting anticipatory bail for offences carrying a maximum sentence of seven years?
- Whether the investigating officer must provide a seven‑day notice and follow Supreme Court guidelines before arresting the applicants?
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023s. 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023s. 316(2), s. 318(4), s. 54
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.MA/25420/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/03/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY
BAIL) NO. 25420 of 2025
================================================
SANJEEVKUMAR C, S/O LATE K. NARAYANAN NAIR & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================
Appearance:
AMITKUMAR V CHAUDHARY(9553) for the Applicant(s) No.
1,2,3,4
MR. MAULIK M SONI(7249) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR RUCHIT J VYAS(10687) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
Date : 11/03/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. By 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. 11993006251111 of 2025
registered with ‘A’ Division Police Station, Gandhidham, District:
Kachchh, for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4)
and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).
2. At the outset, the learned advocate for the applicants would
Page 1 of 2
R/CR.MA/25420/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/03/2026
submit that the offences alleged in the impugned FIR are the one
in which maximum punishment prescribed for is upto 7 years.
Accordingly, on instructions, he states that the applicants are
ready and willing to join the investigation and will appear before
the investigating officer as per direction of this Court.
3. Considering the above, the applicants are hereby directed to
remain present before the Investigating Officer concerned on or
before 23.03.2026 and co-operate with the investigation and if at
all the Investigating Officer deems it fit to arrest the applicant, a 7
days’ prior notice shall be given to him. Further, the Investigating
Officer is directed to scrupulously follow the proposition of law as
settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Arnesh
Kumar v. State of Bihar, reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273, Satender
Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., reported
in (2022) 10 SCC 51 and in Md. Asfak Alam v. State of Jharkhand
& Anr., reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 892 and also inform about
the grounds of arrest, if needed, to learned Magistrate and even
the learned Magistrate before mechanically authorizing the
detention of the applicants, shall follow the dictum of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the aforesaid decisions.
4. With aforesaid directions, this application stands disposed
of. Direct service is permitted.
[ P. M. Raval, J. ]
hiren/DB/1/9tss11326
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 11/03/2026 14:16:39
Page 2 of 2
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.