Gujarat High Court
Rameshbhai @ Michael Jagubhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 5 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025
undefined
Reserved On : 29/07/2025
Pronounced On : 05/08/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 14734
of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
RAMESHBHAI @ MICHAEL JAGUBHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. AMAAN SYED(14385) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. NIRAJ SHARMA APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
CAV JUDGMENT
1. By way of the present 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.III-1377 of 2016 registered with Olpad Police Station, Surat Rural, for the alleged offences as mentioned in the FIR.
2. Learned senior advocate Mr. I. H. Syed assisted by Page 1 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined learned advocate Mr. Amaan Syed appears on behalf of the applicant has submitted that on the basis of certain secret information received by the police officer, they had kept watch upon particular area, and at that relevant point of time, one vehicle passed through the said area and the description of the vehicle matched with the information received by the police party, and therefore, they intercepted the said vehicle and upon search of the same, contraband prohibited articles have been recovered from the said vehicle, and therefore, FIR has been registered against the driver of the said vehicle. During the course of investigation, name of the co- accused have come on surface and they have shown as wanted accused person in the body of the FIR.
3. Learned senior advocate Mr. Syed submits that, in fact, the so-called incident has occurred on 26.10.2016, and on the very same day, FIR has been registered and pursuance to which, investigation was commenced, and during the course of investigation, only on the basis of the statement made by the co-accused before the police officer that the said consignment of prohibitory goods have been purchased on the strength of the applicant's licenced liquor shop, the present applicant is sought to be arraigned as an accused.
4. Learned senior advocate Mr. Syed submits that, in fact, as soon as the applicant has come to know about the said fact, immediately he approached this Hon'ble court by way of filing quashing petition, however, the said petition had not been entertained by this Hon'ble court, but then Page 2 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined after, he preferred another petition before this Hon'ble court for proper investigation to be carried out at the instance of the Gujarat Police, and in the said proceedings, applicant is protected and said protection is continued till May 2025, and right now, present application is preferred. He submits that, in fact, during the interregnum period, much water has flown under the bridge as the investigation qua rest of the accused persons have already been completed and they have been chargesheeted. He submitted that during the interregnum period, applicant herein had made a request addressing letter to the investigating officer concerned that for the purpose of necessary investigation, if his presence is needed, in that event, he is ready and willing to appear before the investigating officer, however, despite serving the said letter, the investigating officer had never called him for interrogation. He submitted that the above-stated sequence of incidents of event clearly go on to show that as such investigation is concluded and presence of the applicant is at all not needed for the purpose of further investigation, and as per the principle of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharth v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another reported in 2022(1) SCC 676, if investigation is concluded and only formality of submitting chargesheet is pending, in that event, as per the provision of Section 170 of Cr.P.C. presence of accused is not needed and those proceedings would not be impeded in deciding the anticipatory bail application. He has relied upon the Page 3 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another reported in 2022 (10) SCC page 51, and submitted that the aforesaid principle of law is reiterated. Learned advocate Mr. Syed has also relied upon the ratio laid down in the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Tarsem Lal v. Directorate of Enforcement Jalandhar Zonal Office reported in (2024) 7 Supreme Court Cases 61 as well as judgment delivered by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Court on its own motion v. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2004 (72) DRJ 629 and submitted that this is a case wherein at the time of submission of chargesheet, the accused presence is not needed. The applicant is ready and wiling to give all kind of cooperation to the investigating officer. He further submits that, in fact, based upon the same set of material and documentations, number of offences have been registered against the applicant by the Gujarat Police, and in almost all cases, he has been acquitted by the trial court. He is regularly attending all those court proceedings, and therefore, this is a fit case wherein discretionary power of anticipatory bail can be exercised in favour of the applicant. Considering the above totality of the facts of the matter, applicant may be released on anticipatory bail by imposing suitable terms and conditions.
5. Learned APP Mr. Niraj Sharma who appears on behalf of the respondent - State has objected the present Page 4 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined application with vehemence and acrimoniously submits that involvement of the present applicant in commission of crime is clearly spelt out from the police papers. In fact, immediately after registration of the FIR, applicant herein had approached this Hon'ble court by way of filing quashing petition wherein he has raised manyfold grounds, but after considering and appreciating all those documents and material available on record, this Hon'ble court has not entertained the said application and dismissed it. Then after, he had filed another petition before this Hon'ble court for the purpose of proper investigation wherein protection has been granted by this Hon'ble court, and the said protection is continued till May 2025, and recently, the said petition had been withdrawn by the applicant as the co-ordinate bench of this court has not entertained the said petition.
6. Learned APP Mr. Niraj Sharma further submits that pursuance to FIR, investigation commenced and during the course of investigation, important material have been collected by the investigating officer and statement of important witnesses have been recorded which clearly go onto show the direct involvement of the applicant in commission of crime. He further submits that, in fact, investigating officer concerned had issued notice to the applicant to be remained present before the investigating officer on particular date, despite serving notice, the applicant has chosen not to appear and supply documents to the investigating officer. He submitted that copy of said notice was served to the son of the Page 5 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined applicant, copy of which is produced by learned APP during the course of hearing which clearly fortifies that with a sole intent to evade the proceedings of investigation, he has not remained present despite the fact that he was living under the umbrella of protection of this court. Therefore, the said act of the applicant clearly goes onto show that he was non-cooperative.
7. Learned APP Mr. Sharma has put reliance upon the statement of the witnesses. He submits that, however, those are the accused persons and he is very much mindful about the fact that the statement of the co- accused have no relevance, but the sequence of incidents of events narrated in the said statement clearly goes onto show that involvement of the applicant in commission of crime is clearly spelt out and without getting custodial interrogation of the present applicant, investigating officer concerned could not be able to carry out investigation in proper direction. He has further submitted that co-accused, who is the nephew of the present applicant has disclosed the fact that at the instance of the present applicant, entire business is being run and handled by the said person. All the accused persons had come in contact with him at the instance of the present applicant and all those accused persons were at regular intervals used to come to his office for the purpose of purchase of illegal contraband from his liquor shop and they were also knowing that all those persons are bootleggers and by way of illegal means, the accused have brought the prohibited muddamal goods within the Page 6 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined territory of State of Gujarat despite the fact that Gujarat is dry State and prohibition law is in existence. Therefore, from the very beginning, in connivance with each other, they had organized a cartel to push prohibited articles within the territory of State of Gujarat illegally. The present applicant is a very criminal minded person and he never used to talk directly, but always used to talk to the other co-accused persons with the use of mobile of his nephew, and the said fact has come on record during the course of investigation.
8. Learned APP Mr. Sharma has submitted that there is no doubt about the settled proposition of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex court in Siddharth (supra) and subsequently reiterated in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra), and the said judgments are the law of land and police officer has to strictly adhere with the dictum of the judgment in true spirit and proper prospective. He has read the operative part of the judgment and submitted that the facts narrated in the said judgment is quite different and distinct. Herein this case on hand, investigating officer is of the clear opinion that for the purpose of carrying out further investigation, custodial interrogation of the applicant is badly needed. The case upon which reliance has been placed by the learned senior advocate for the applicant wherein ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex court specifically stating that if investigation is concluded and matter is pending for submission of chargesheet before the Hon'ble court, in that event, simply non-availability of the accused would Page 7 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined not become impediment for the investigating officer. In absence of the accused, chargesheet can be submitted before the court concerned as per the statutory provision of Section 170 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, the facts narrated in the above-stated judgments are quite different and distinct than the facts of the present application, and therefore, despite the fact that police authority had strictly adhered with the dictum of said orders of the Hon'ble Apex court, benefit would not be extended in favour of the applicant because without getting custody of the applicant, investigating officer could not be able to submit chargesheet before the competent court. Considering the above-stated factual aspects of the matter, this is a fit case wherein Hon'ble court may not have to exercise discretionary power of anticipatory bail in favour of the applicant as there are more than 23 offences have been credited in the account of the applicant, which clearly go onto show that he is a history sheeter and made his hand in glove with the other co- accused persons to destabilize the law and order situation within the territory of State of Gujarat by flouting the rules and regulations issued by the licensing authority at the time of issuance of licence.
9. Learned APP Mr. Sharma has further submitted that at the time of issuance of licence, the licensing authority has given a cap that retail vendor shall not have to sell liquor in quantity not exceeding 4.5 liters or 6 quarter bottles in one transaction. The co-accused was in constant touch with another co-accused i.e. Sanat who Page 8 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined had made 286 calls to the co-accused no.1 and Salim had made 19 calls to the co-accused. The CDR record collected by the investigating officer shows that co- accused persons were in constant touch with each other.
10. Learned APP Mr. Sharma has further submitted that, in fact, Superintendent of Police, Surat Rural, Surat, has written a letter to the Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Ahmedabad, on 25.01.2017, stating that the banking transactions of some business enterprises of past 4 years alone reflect transactions of around 225 crores approximately, and on the strength of the said information provided, the ED had initiated proceedings against the present applicant and those proceedings are still pending before the competent court for adjudication. Considering the above-stated factual aspects of the matter, this is a fit case wherein Hon'ble court may not have to exercise discretionary power of anticipatory bail in favour of the applicant.
11. I have heard and considered the arguments canvassed by the learned advocates for the parties and perused the material available on record. It is found out from the record that pursuance to FIR, investigation commenced and during the course of investigation, number of important material have been collected by the investigating officer and statement of important witnesses have been recorded which clearly go onto show the direct involvement of the applicant in commission of crime. It further transpires that investigating officer concerned had issued notice to the Page 9 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined applicant to be remained present before the investigating officer on particular date, despite serving notice, the applicant has chosen not to appear and supply documents to the investigating officer. However, the argument made by the learned advocate for the applicant with regard to the notice that the said notice was served to the son of the applicant cannot be taken into consideration as the applicant is very much aware of the proceedings which is carried out against him in the present FIR, therefore, it clearly fortifies the intent of the present applicant to evade the proceedings of investigation in spite of the protection given to him by this court, and this is a clear cut non-cooperation on the part of the applicant.
12. It further transpires from the record that particularly from the statement of the witnesses though they are the co- accused persons, the sequence of events narrated in the said statements prima-facie show involvement of the present applicant in commission of crime. The learned advocate for the applicant has relied upon various judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court as well as Hon'ble High Court wherein the main argument put forward by him is that if investigation is concluded and only formality of submitting chargesheet is pending, in that event, as per the provision of Section 170 of Cr.P.C., presence of accused is not needed and those proceedings would not be impeded in deciding the anticipatory bail application, however, in the present case, prosecution requires custodial interrogation of the present applicant and Page 10 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined without it, the investigating officer concerned would not be able to carry out investigation in proper direction. With that regard, the learned APP has placed on record CDRs of the co-accused which reflects that the co- accused persons were in constant touch with each other whereby co-accused namely Sanat had made 286 calls to the co-accused no.1 and Salim had made 19 calls to the co-accused. It further prima-facie transpires from the record that the entire business is being run and handled by the nephew of the present applicant, but at the instance of the present applicant, all the accused persons had come in contact with the nephew of the present applicant, and all those accused persons were at regular intervals used to come to his office for the purpose of purchase of illegal contraband from his liquor shop. It further transpires that the present applicant never used to talk directly to other co-accused persons, but he always used to talk to them with the use of mobile of his nephew. Therefore, it transpires that in connivance with each other they had organized a cartel to push prohibited articles within the territory of State of Gujarat illegally, and hence, it prima-facie establishes the role of the present applicant in commission of crime. Moreover, the present applicant is a history sheeter as more than 23 offences have been credited in the account of the present applicant.
13. It further transpires from the letter dated 25.01.2017 of the Superintendent of Police, Surat Rural, written to the Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Page 11 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined Ahmedabad, that the present applicant is involved in banking transactions of some business enterprises of past 4 years alone reflecting transactions of around 225 crores approximately, and on the strength of the said information, the ED had initiated proceedings against the present applicant which are still pending before the competent court for adjudication.
14. Further, I am of the considered opinion that the facts of the present case is quite different and distinct than the case laws cited hereinabove by the learned advocate for the applicant, and therefore, benefit of discretion power of anticipatory bail could not be extended in favour of the applicant because without getting custody of the applicant investigating officer could not be able to submit chargesheet before the competent court.
15. At this stage, it is required to be noted that as this application has been preferred under the provisions of Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail, I would like to refer the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.,, reported in (2011) 1 SCC 694, more particularly Paragraph Nos.14 & 112, which read as under :-
"14. It is clear from the Statement of Objects and Reasons that the purpose of incorporating Section 438 in the Cr.P.C. was to recognize the importance of personal liberty and freedom in a free and democratic country. When we carefully Page 12 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined analyze this section, the wisdom of the legislature becomes quite evident and clear that the legislature was keen to ensure respect for the personal liberty and also pressed in service the age-old principle that an individual is presumed to be innocent till he is found guilty by the court.
112. The following factors and parameters can be taken into consideration while dealing with the anticipatory bail: The nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the accused must be properly comprehended before arrest is made; the antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether the accused has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence; The possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; The possibility of the accused's likelihood to repeat similar or the other offences. Whereas the accusation have been made only with the object to injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting him or her. Impact of grant of anticipatory bail particularly in cases of large magnitude affecting a very large number of people. The courts must evaluate the entire available material against the accused very carefully. The court must also clearly comprehend the exact role of the accused in the case."
16. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumitha Page 13 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined Pradeep Vs. Arun Kumar C.K. & Anr., reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1529 held that merely because custodial interrogation was not required by itself could not be a ground to grant anticipatory bail. The first and the foremost thing the Court hearing the anticipatory bail application is to consider is the prima facie case against the accused. The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"It may be true, as pointed out by learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1, that charge-sheet has already been filed. It will be unfair to presume on our part that the Investigating Officer does not require Respondent No.1 for custodial interrogation for the purpose of further investigation. Be that as it may, even assuming it a case where Respondent No.1 is not required for custodial interrogation, we are satisfied that the High Court ought not to have granted discretionary relief of anticipatory bail. We are dealing with a matter wherein the original complainant (appellant herein) has come before this Court praying that the anticipatory bail granted by the High Court to the accused should be cancelled. To put it in other words, the complainant says that the High Court wrongly exercised its discretion while granting anticipatory bail to the accused in a very serious crime like POCSO and, therefore, the order passed by the High Court granting anticipatory Page 14 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined bail to the accused should be quashed and set aside. In many anticipatory bail matters, we have noticed one common argument being canvassed that no custodial interrogation is required and, therefore, anticipatory bail may be granted. There appears to be a serious misconception of law that if no case for custodial interrogation is made out by the prosecution, then that alone would be a good ground to grant anticipatory bail. Custodial interrogation can be one of the relevant aspects to be considered along with other grounds while deciding an application seeking anticipatory bail. There may be many cases in which the custodial interrogation of the accused may not be required, but that does not mean that the prima facie case against the accused should be ignored or overlooked and he should be granted anticipatory bail. The first and foremost thing that the court hearing an anticipatory bail application should consider is the prima facie case put up against the accused. Thereafter, the nature of the offence should be looked into along with the severity of the punishment. Custodial interrogation can be one of the grounds to decline custodial interrogation. However, even if custodial interrogation is not required or necessitated, by itself, cannot be a ground to grant anticipatory bail."
17. Thus while taking into consideration the ratio laid down Page 15 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre (supra) as also ratio laid down in other decisions as stated above, I have gone through the contents of the FIR, which is placed on record and also considered the affidavit of the investigating officer filed before the learned Judge concerned opposing the bail application preferred by the applicant. Upon going through the contents of the FIR, it appears that prima facie case is made out against the applicant and material collected so far suggests the involvement of the applicant in the commission of crime.
18. It is required to be noted at this stage that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in catena of judicial pronouncements have observed that a court may reject an anticipatory bail application when custodial interrogation is deemed necessary for a thorough investigation, even if the applicant argues that such interrogation isn't required. Further, while custodial interrogation can be a factor in denying anticipatory bail, it is not the sole determinant, and courts will also consider other factors related to the severity of the offense and the need for a comprehensive investigation.
19. In the above facts and circumstances and considering the observations on the legal aspect of the matter, as applicant is actively involved in the offence, I have absolutely no doubt that if applicant is equipped with such an order of anticipatory bail before he is interrogated by the Police, in that event, it would greatly harm the investigation and would impede the prospects Page 16 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14734/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined of unearthing the serious offence and applicant may again indulge in such type of criminal activities. Therefore, I do not find any exceptional ground to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the BNSS to grant anticipatory bail. More so, investigation is still going on in the present case. It is settled proposition of law that power exercisable under Section 482 BNSS, is somewhat discretionary in character and it is to be exercised with caution in exceptional cases.
20. Hence, the present application seeking for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected.
21. Needless to say that observations and findings made hereinabove are limited to the decision of these pre- arrest bail applications, and shall not influence any other proceedings arise from impugned FIR.
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J) AMIT ITALIAN Page 17 of 17 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 05 22:46:22 IST 2025