High Court of Gujarat
CHAITANYAKUMAR SHAMBHUBHAI PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- P M RAVAL
Holding
The Court held that, given the civil character of the dispute, the applicant's clean record, and his assurance of cooperation, anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS may be granted with appropriate conditions.
Summary
The applicant, Chaitanyakumar ShambhuBhai Patel, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, fearing arrest in connection with an FIR relating to a civil dispute over immigration services and a refund. The applicant asserted no prior criminal record and pledged to cooperate with the investigation, while the State opposed bail citing the seriousness of the alleged offence. The Court examined the nature of the dispute, the applicant's clean antecedents, and the risk of flight, referring to precedents such as Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia, and Sushila Aggarwal. Concluding that the matter was essentially civil, the applicant posed no flight risk, and bail conditions could mitigate any concerns, the Court granted anticipatory bail with a personal bond and several conditions. The order also clarified that the bail does not impede police investigation and that the trial court should not be bound by the present observations.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482 of the BNSS in a case arising from a civil dispute.
- Whether the nature and gravity of the alleged offence justify denial of bail.
- Whether the applicant poses a risk of fleeing or tampering with evidence.
- Whether the conditions imposed are sufficient to safeguard the investigation.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023s. 482, s. 483(2)
Subjects
anticipatory bailSection 482BNSS 2023civil disputeimmigration servicesflight riskbail conditions
Judgment
R/CR.MA/4650/2026 ORDER DATED: 11/03/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 4650
of 2026
==========================================================
CHAITANYAKUMAR SHAMBHUBHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NL RAMNANI(2400) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. A. N. RAMNANI (14156) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
Date : 11/03/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives
service of notice of rule for respondent – State of Gujarat.
2. 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.
11196008250072 of 2025, registered with J.P. Road Police
Station, District: Vadodara for the offences alleged therein.
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
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
Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/4650/2026 ORDER DATED: 11/03/2026
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
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, following aspects
have been taken into consideration:
Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/4650/2026 ORDER DATED: 11/03/2026
a) It transpires that the dispute between the parties
primarily arises out of the nature of the transaction carried
out between them. The grievance appears to relate to whether
the immigration work was completed and with regard to the
refund of the amount allegedly paid for the purpose of
obtaining immigration, which ultimately could not be secured
by the present applicant. Considering the fact that the parties
had also entered into an agreement governing the said
transaction, the dispute appears to be predominantly civil in
nature.
b) the applicant has no past antecedents;
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/4650/2026 ORDER DATED: 11/03/2026
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 or before 25.03.2026 between 11.00 a.m. and
2.00 p.m. and the Investigating Officer shall ensure that
no unnecessary harassment or inconvenience is caused
to the applicant;
(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/4650/2026 ORDER DATED: 11/03/2026
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.
(P. M. RAVAL, J)
MOHD SAIF ULLAH
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: MOHD SAIF ULLAH(HC02372), ENGLISH STENO GRADE-II\, at High Court of Gujarat on 11/03/2026 17:52:57
Page 5 of 5
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