SURESHBHAI PARSOTTAMDAS NAYAK ANR v. STATE OF GUJARAT

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.11206005210315 of 2021, registered with Bavlu Police Station, District: Mahesana for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34, 504 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code.

Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule for respondent – State of Gujarat.

Learned advocate for the applicants submits that the R/CR.MA/718/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2026 nature of allegations are such that custodial interrogation at 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.

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.

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 R/CR.MA/718/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2026 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) that the applicant no.1 was a Circle Officer and applicant no.2 was E-Dhara Officer; b) the applicants have not been named in the FIR and they were Government Servants and the principal accused who have been named in the FIR, who are beneficiaries of the said transaction have been granted anticipatory bail by the Coordinate Bench; c) the role attributed to the present applicants is of certifying the entries and the present applicants have already retired from their services and at the time of filing the present anticipatory bail, the applicant no.1 was 67 years and applicant no.2 was 65 years; d) the learned advocate for the applicants has assured that the applicants will not flee from justice and would be R/CR.MA/718/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2026 available during investigation as well as the trial.

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.

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.

Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. URIL RANA

(SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)