Oral Order

1. The applicant, who is apprehending arrest at the hands of Gujarat University Police Station, Ahmedabad has preferred the present application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying for pre-arrest bail. The FIR in question came to be registered vide FIR. No. I-11191017250197 of 2025 under Sections 316(2), 318(3) and 54 of BNS, 2023.

2. Heard Mr. Rushabh R. Shah, learned advocate for the applicant and Ms. Jirga Jhaveri, learned APP for the respondent State.

3. Mr. Rushabh Shah, learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that, the applicant is aged 85 years and is the father-in-law of accused no. 1. The applicant is only a partner qua 10% in the partnership firm and has nothing to do with the day to day affairs of the firm. Mr. Shah submitted that, even if the whole FIR is perused, nowhere the active role of the applicant in the alleged transaction surfaces. The original accused no. 1 had approached the coordinate bench of this Court by way of quashing petition being Criminal Misc. Application No. 27167 of 2025 whereby the Court has granted interim relief to the applicant inasmuch as the investigation may continue but no coercive steps may be taken against the applicant no. 1. The applicant does not have any criminal antecedents, hence, this application should be allowed and the applicant be enlarged on anticipatory bail. Mr. Shah, learned advocate for the applicant, under instructions, has also stated that, the applicant is ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation, and would appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

4. Heard learned APP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the respondent State who has strongly opposed this application submitting that, the Hence, this application should be rejected.

5. At the outset, it does appear that, the applicant is aged 85 years which fact has weighed with this court. So also, there do not appear to be any direct or express allegations against the applicant, however, the fact that he was a partner in Tirth Realty partnership firm cannot be overlooked. Hence, it deems fit to this court to direct the applicant to appear before the Investigating Officer on 09.02.2026 and cooperate with the investigation.

6. The Investigating Officer is directed to scrupulously follow the proposition of law as settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273, in case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51 and in case of Md. Asfak Alam Vs. 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 applicant shall follow the dictum of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid decisions.

7. In case, the Investigating Officer needs to arrest the applicant, notice of 7 days shall be given to the applicant prior to such arrest.

8. In view of the above, the present application stands disposed of. Direct service is permitted.