IN THE COURT OF 4th ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
VADODARA @ DABHOI.

(Crl.M.A. No.107 of 2025)

2

Henil Bhaveshbhai Pansheriya,
Aged : 20 years, Occupation : Service,
R/o. : Vardhman Soc., Shyam Dham Chowk,
Nana Varachha, Surat.
Original R/o. Nesdi, Ta.: Savarkundala, Dist.: Amreli.
…Applicant

VERSUS

The State of Gujarat.
Through Ld. Addl. AP.P., Dabhoi.
…Opponent
————————————————————————————————
Appearance:-
Shri Z. I. Vhora, Learned Advocate for the Applicant.
Shri H. B. Chauhan, Learned A.P.P. for the State.
———————————————————————————————–

APPLICATION FOR REGULAR BAIL
:: J U D G M E N T ::

1) The present bail application is filed by the accused/applicant for
releasing him on regular bail in connection with FIR No.
11197014252291/2025 registered at Dabhoi Police Station for the offences
punishable under Section 108, 351(2), 319(2), 54 of BNS and Section 66(C),
66(D) of I.T. Act.
2) Pursuant to filing of the application, notice came to be issued and served
upon the opponent State and the learned A.P.P. has appeared on behalf of the
State and filed the affidavit prepared by the I.O. at Exh.4 and argued the present
application.
3) The brief facts of the present case are that the above FIR was registered
on 25.11.2025 on the complaint of Anshbhai Rajeshbhai Patel who was the
nephew of the deceased Atulbhai Hirabhai Patel. It is stated in the FIR that the
complainant and deceased were living in a joint family in the same house and
on 16.11.2025, he noticed that deceased Atulbhai Hirabhai Patel was disturbed
and he was talking to someone on his mobile. It is further stated in the FIR that
3
the complainant had overheard that the deceased was talking about fraud
amounting to Rs.4 crore and when he inquired from the deceased about that, he
told him that he had received a video call on his whats-app from some officer
of Anti Terrorist Squad and he had told him that, a fraud of Rs.4 crore has been
done by using the mobile phone of the deceased. It is further stated in the FIR
that deceased had told the complainant to not to tell this to anyone so the
complainant remained silent. It is further stated in the FIR that on 17.11.2025,
at about 5 a.m. in the morning the wife of the deceased came crying and
informed the father and mother of the complainant that her husband had
consumed some poison/pesticide. It is further stated in the FIR that, after that
Atulbhai was taken to Vraj Hospital at Vadodara for treatment and during the
treatment, he had expired on 18.11.2025. It is further stated in the complaint
that after the deceased was admitted in the Hospital, the complainant had
checked the mobile phone of the Atulbhai and she saw that messages coming
on the on whats-app of the mobile phone of deceased, from the mobile number
7383699531 and he had also noticed that several whats-app video calls had
been made from this number on the mobile phone of Atulbhai. It is further
stated in the FIR that, on the same morning, i.e. on 17.11.2025 at about 6.20
a.m., one message of good morning came on the mobile phone of Atulbhai on
the above number and when the complainant had replied that message and
asked who are you?, he had received the photo of ID Card of ATS Gourav
Grover. It is further stated in the FIR that when the complainant had informed
on that number that, Atulbhai is admitted in the hospital, he had received one
video call in which the caller did not show his face and asked the complainant
to show his face but the complaint had refused the same and on that, the caller
had cut the call. Thereafter the caller had again made a call and told the
complainant that he will issue a warrant against him to which the complaint had
replied that he can do anything which he wants to do and thereafter the
4
complainant had cut that call and blocked that number. It is further stated in the
FIR that after death of the deceased, the complainant had informed the family
about these facts and made a complaint in the Police Station with screenshots of
the whats-app chat. After the registration of above FIR, the present applicant
was arrested and presently he is in judicial custody.
4) It is argued on behalf of the applicant that, he is innocent and he has been
falsely implicated in the present case. It is further argued that as per the
affidavit filed by the IO, the applicant Henil is not the person who made call on
the mobile phone of the deceased Atulbhai from the mobile number
7383699531. It is further argued that the above mobile number is not in the
name of the present applicant and therefore he is not involved in the present
case. It is further argued that, the sim-card used for making call has not been
recovered from the present applicant. It is further argued that from the affidavit
of the IO at Exh.4, it is clear that the applicant was not the person who had
made whats-app video call to the deceased Atulbhai. It is further argued that as
per the allegations in the FIR, the calls were made by the person namely
Gourav Grover and therefore the applicant has no role in the offence and he
has not instigated the deceased in any manner to commit suicide therefore the
offence punishable under section 108 of the BNS is not made out in this case. It
is further argued that the present applicant has clean antecedents and he is ready
to abide by all the conditions imposed by this court and he will made himself
available before this court as and when required. With these arguments, learned
advocate for the applicant has prayed that the present application may be
allowed.
5) Per contra, learned A. P. P. for the State has strongly opposed the bail
application and has argued that, the present applicant has direct role in the
offence and during the investigation, the Call Detail Record was obtained
which shows that the mobile number – 7383699531 which is used for making
5
call to the deceased Atulbhai was issued in the name of Bhaveshbhai
Pansheriya who is the father of the applicant and on the interrogation of
applicant it was revealed that he had obtained that sim-card of Airtel from the
co-accused Nikunjbhai. It is further argued on behalf of the State that on the
basis of interrogation report of the applicant, Nikunjbhai was interrogated and
he had disclosed that the mobile sim-card used for the offence had been
obtained from the one Prakash and after obtaining that sim-card they had
checked that sim-card by inserting it in the mobile phone and during the
investigation 8 mobile phones in which the said sim-card had been used have
been recovered and seized. It is further argued by the Ld. APP for the state that
during the investigation, it is revealed that the sim-card of the mobile phone
No. 7383699531 had been handed over to the Chintanbha Nagarbhai Mandaliya
along with 438 other sim-cards for doing the offence of digital arrest. It is
further argued that the applicant is a part of big conspiracy of doing the crimes
of digital arrest and therefore considering the gravity of the offence, the present
application may be rejected. With these arguments, learned APP has prayed that
the present application may be rejected.
6) I have heard the arguments of the parties and perused the record. as per
the affidavit filed by the IO, the allegation upon the present applicant is that he
along with the co-accused had played a part in obtaining the sim-card of the
mobile number 7383699531 from the Prakash and further supplying it to one
Chintanbhai Nagarbhai Mandaliya. The perusal of the record shows that the
applicant in the present case is not the person who had made call on the mobile
phone of the deceased Atulbhai from the mobile number 7383699531. Further
on query from the IO that whether the Customer Application Form of the
mobile Number 7383699531 has been obtained or not, from the service
provider Airtel, he has submitted that no application has been made in this
respect to the service provider and seized mobile phones have not been sent for
6
forensic examination. It is surprising that in a case of IT Act in which the
mobile number has been disclosed, the IO has not made any effort to obtain the
customer application form from the service provider so that it can be found out
that from which vendor that mobile sim-card had been purchased and who had
purchased the sim-card. Further on inquiry from the IO, in respect to
Bhaveshbhai Pansheriya in whose name the said mobile sim-card is issued, the
IO has submitted that he has not interrogated Bhaveshbhai Pansheriya. The
perusal of the record shows that no suicide note has been left by the deceased
implicating anyone. The perusal of the affidavit also shows that sim card of the
mobile number 7383699531 which had been used to make whats-app call to
the deceased Atulbhai has not been recovered from the present applicant.
Further, the applicant is in custody since 25.11.2025 and now he has no more
required for the offence in interrogation or investigation or any recovery. The
applicant has clean antecedents therefore, considering the nature of allegation
and material against him, the present application is allowed with the following
order.
However, it is made clear that; any observations made herein shall not be
construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
// O R D E R //
1] The Criminal Misc. Application No. 107/2025 is hereby allowed.
2] The applicant namely Henil Bhaveshbhai Pansheriya, is ordered to be
released on bail in connection with FIR No.11197014252291/2025
registered at Dabhoi Police Station, on executing Personal Bond of Rs.
25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with a surety of the like
amount, to be furnished in the Court of concerned Magistrate, to the
satisfaction of that Court, subject to following conditions :-
1] The applicant shall not take undue advantage of his liberty or misuse his
liberty.
7
2] The applicant shall mark his presence in the concerned police station on
every fifteenth day of every month for the next six months.
3] The applicant shall maintain law and order and shall render cooperation
to the Investigating Officer in carrying out investigation.
4] The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so
as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police
Officers or tamper with the evidence.
5] The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Judicial
Magistrate and if he do not have any passport, then shall file affidavit
to that effect before the concerned Judicial Magistrate.
6] The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the concerned
Court.
7] The surety of the applicant shall have to produce his photograph at the
time of executing the Surety Bond, and these photograph shall not be
more than six months’ old.
8] The Investigating Officer is directed to verify the permanent addresses
of the applicant and to furnish a Report in this respect before the concerned
Judicial Magistrate.
3] A yadi of this order be sent to the concerned Police Station.
Signed and Pronounced in the Open Court on this 4th day of December, 2025.

DABHOI
DATE : 04/12/2025

Sd/-
(RAHUL SHARMA)
4th ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
VADODARA @ DABHOI.
CODE No. 01588.