High Court grants anticipatory bail emphasizing personal liberty & compliance with investigating agency.

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in connection with FIR under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act and the Indian Penal Code. The Court emphasized personal liberty, the judiciary's discretion, and the applicant's compliance with the Investigating Agency. Conditions for release included cooperation, non-interference, and address updates. The decision was influenced by the applicant's behavior post a Supreme Court judgment, citing the importance of arrest as a last resort. The Trial Court was instructed to independently assess the case.

---

---

Issues:
Grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with FIR under Section 85(2)(C) of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Analysis:
The applicant filed a successive application for anticipatory bail after the rejection of a previous application and a subsequent quashing petition. The High Court considered the applicant's cooperation with the Investigating Agency and the seriousness of the alleged offences. The Court noted the absence of any arrest during the period without protection and the applicant's readiness to provide further documents. The judgment in Siddhram Satlingappa Mhetre case was cited, emphasizing that arrest should be the last option and restricted to exceptional cases. The Court exercised discretion in favor of the applicant based on changed circumstances post the pronouncement of the said judgment.

The Court highlighted the importance of personal liberty and the need for a wise and careful use of discretion by the judiciary in granting anticipatory bail. It noted the applicant's compliance with appearing before the Investigating Agency and willingness to cooperate further. The change in circumstances due to the Supreme Court judgment was a crucial factor in the decision to grant anticipatory bail.

The Court allowed the application for anticipatory bail, setting conditions for the applicant's release upon arrest. The conditions included cooperation with the Investigating Agency, non-interference with witnesses or evidence, and intimation of address changes. The Court also addressed the possibility of police remand, clarifying the process and the applicant's rights in such a scenario. The observations in the order were deemed prima facie, emphasizing that the Trial Court should decide the matter on its own merits without influence from the High Court's observations.

In conclusion, the High Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, highlighting the importance of personal liberty, the discretion of the judiciary in such matters, and the specific conditions imposed for the applicant's release upon arrest. The judgment considered the applicant's cooperation, the seriousness of the alleged offences, and the legal principles laid down in the Siddhram Satlingappa Mhetre case regarding the grant of anticipatory bail.

---