Gujarat High Court
Vaishnani Vipul Dalsukhbhai vs State Of Gujarat on 27 July, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 17277
of 2026
==========================================================
VAISHNANI VIPUL DALSUKHBHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS HONEY M RAVAL(11856) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ROHAN RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER
Date : 27/07/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of the present application under Section 482 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short
“BNSS”), the applicant – accused has prayed to release him
on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection
with the FIR being C.R. No.11201005250003 of 2025
registered with CID Crime Police Station, Vadodara Zone for
the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467,
468, 471, 474, 114 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and
for Sections 13(1)(a), 13(1)(b), 13(2) and 7(a) of the Prevention
of Corruption Act, 1988.
2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule
for respondent-State.
Page 1 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
3. It is alleged in the FIR that the contractors like the
applicant herein were awarded the work under the `Nal Se
Jal’ scheme; the applicant herein got the work for villages
viz. Bachkariya, Ditvas, Babro, and Shir in Kadana and
Santrampur taluka of Mahisagar district; necessary
agreements were executed with the respective Water
Committees; that the pipes to be used in the said projects
were purchased from Kamdhenu pipes, Rajkot through valid
invoices, which invoices have been verified by the WASMO
(Water and Sanitation Management Organization),
Gandhinagar and were found to be genuine as per the letter
dated 08.08.202 issued by the Chief Engineer.
3.1 The main allegation in the said FIR pertain to the
misappropriation of government funds and use of bogus
documents. It is the case of the applicant that the applicant
has neither prepared any false documents nor misappropriated
any funds.
4. Heard learned advocate Ms.Honey Raval for the
applicant and learned APP Mr.Rohan Raval for the
respondent-State.
5. Learned advocate for the applicant has mainly argued
that the name of the applicant is not disclosed in the FIR;
no specific role is attributed to the applicant; the allegations
Page 2 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
are general in nature, without any specific overt act
attributed to the applicant; the case is based entirely on
documentary evidence which is already in possession of the
Investigating Agency; that the FIR is a clear attempt to give
a criminal colour to a contractual dispute; that the FIR has
been registered without proper verification of factsl that the
contract in question was not awarded to the present
applicant; that the work pertaining to the concerned village
was executed by M/s Chirag Rig Services Agency and not by
the applicant.
6. It is submitted that the allegation regarding the supply
of pipes is also unfounded; that the bills issued by the
applicant pertain to Kamdhenu pipes, bearing registered
trademark `Bhimani’; that the Chief Engineer, WASMO also
confirmed that the invoices issued by the applicant’s firm
were consistent with the records submitted for payment; the
applicant negates that the allegation of non-supply or use of
substandard material.
7. It is further submitted that the FIR was lodged after a
delay and there is no cogent reason as to why the FIR has
been lodged after such a long delay.
8. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
appearing on behalf of the respondent – State has
Page 3 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
vehemently opposed the present application and has
submitted that the government has floated one scheme viz.
Nal Se Jal’ for the welfare for the villages of Mahisagar
district, wherein, the accused persons, in connivance with
each other, had committed several illegalities and
irregularities, thereby causing huge loss to the Government
Exchequer.
8.1 Learned APP has further submitted that 620 villages of
Mahisagar are included in the said scheme of ` Nal Se Jal’
and 112 separate agencies / firms / partnership firms /
persons are involved; forged testing reports are placed on
record, work is executed and forged bills are raised and thus
approximately 123 crores rupees are siphoned off. He,
therefore, submitted that custodial interrogation of the
applicant is requird and hence, prayed to dismiss this
application.
8.2 Learned APP has argued that all the accused, in
collusion with each other, with the sole intent to dupe the
Government and defraud the Government, misappropriated
huge volume of amount on the basis of fabricated and forged
bills; the investigation reveals the involvement of the present
applicant in the said offence.
8.3 It has also been pointed out that the anticipatory bail
Page 4 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
of the other co-accused has been rejected by the coordinate
Benches of this Court. It is, therefore, urged that this
application be dismissed.
9. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties, this
Court has considered the rival submissions made by learned
counsel for both the sides and considered the material placed
on record. It is well settled that, among other circumstances,
the factors to be borne in mind while considering an
application for bail are (i) whether there is any prima facie
or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had
committed the offence; (ii) nature and gravity of the
accusation; (iii) severity of the punishment in the event of
conviction; (iv) danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if
released on bail; (v) character, behaviour, means, position and
standing of the accused.
10. There are serious allegations and accusations levelled in
the FIR with respect to the scheme Nal se Jal in Mahisagar
district, where the present applicant was a contractor in
certain villages viz. Bachkariya, Ditvas, Babrol and Shir.
From the investigation papers, it transpires that the present
applicant has committed the following illegalities in the said
villages:
Page 5 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
(i) Village : Babrol, Tal. Santrampur :
The work in this village is being carried out by
the Shrinathji Construction Agency, of which the present
applicant Vaishnani Vipul Dalsukhbhai is a proprietor. The
agency has been given a work order by the Water Supply
Committee from 22.11.2021.
A shorter length of pipeline is installed on site
than the paid pipeline.
The pipeline has been found at a depth less than
the specified depth and has been paid for.
Payments have been made for more work than the
excavation and pipeline laying work done.
Payment was made based on a false invoice.
Loss to government treasury due to price variation
payment based on false invoice.
The work has not been completed. Therefore, the
public cannot get the full benefit of the scheme.
(ii) Village : Shir, Tal. Santrampur :
The work in this village is being carried out by
the Shrinathji Construction Agency, of which the present
applicant Vaishnani Vipul Dalsukhbhai is a proprietor. The
agency has been given a work order by the Water Supply
Committee from 22.11.2021.
Payment was made based on a false invoice.
Page 6 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
Loss to government treasury due to price variation
payment based on false invoice.
A shorter length of pipeline is installed on site
than the paid pipeline.
Payments have been made for more work than the
excavation and pipeline laying work done.
Less house connection has been made than the
approved house connection. Additional payment has been
received by showing more house connection.
The pipeline has been found at a depth less than
the specified depth and has been paid for.
The work has not been completed. Therefore, the
public cannot get the full benefit of the scheme.
(iii) Village : Bachkariya Part-2, Tal. Kadana :
The work in this village is being carried out by
the Shrinathji Construction Agency, of which the present
applicant Vaishnani Vipul Dalsukhbhai is a proprietor. The
agency has been given a work order by the Water Supply
Committee from 18.11.2021.
A shorter length of pipeline is installed on site than
the paid pipeline.
Less house connection has been made than the approved
house connection. Additional payment has been received by
showing more house connection.
Page 7 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
Payments have been made for more work than the
excavation and pipeline laying work done.
The pipeline has been found at a depth less than the
specified depth and has been paid for.
The work has not been completed. Therefore, the public
cannot get the full benefit of the scheme.
(iv) Village : Ditvas, Tal. Kadana :
The work in this village is being carried out by the
Shrinathji Construction Agency, of which the present
applicant Vaishnani Vipul Dalsukhbhai is a proprietor. The
agency has been given a work order by the Water Supply
Committee from 18.11.2021.
A shorter length of pipeline is installed on site than
the paid pipeline.
Payments have been made for more work than the
excavation and pipeline laying work done.
The pipeline has been found at a depth less than the
specified depth and has been paid for.
The work has not been completed. Therefore, the public
cannot get the full benefit of the scheme.
11. Moreover, the present applicant has placed the
invoice No.2122/903 of Kamdhenu Pipes to the tune of
Rs.26,38,022/- stating that the said work was done for Village
Page 8 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
: Ditvas, Tal. Kadana dated 15.11.2021 and on investigation,
when summons were issued under Section 179 of the BNSS,
the owner of the Kamdhenu Pipeshas stated that the said
bill No.2122/903 was for Village : Shir and was not supplied
to Village : Ditvas and if the terms and conditions of the
work are taken into consideration, the present applicant was
not given the work for, has forged the said bill stating to be
that of Village : Ditvas.
12. From the above material found out from the
investigation papers, it would reveal that the present
applicant is involved in the sophisticated white-collar crime
targeting a public welfare scheme viz. ` Nal Se Jal’, which is
designed for providing portable water to the rural households,
which is the fundamental necessity. There is a prima facie
evidence of active involvement of the applicant on the
strength of the investigation papers.
13. From the investigation papers, it reveals that the
applicant has not complied with the guidelines in strict
manner and all the accused, in connivance with each other,
with the sole intent to dupe the Government, had committed
the offence. Thus, the custodial interrogation of the applicant
is necessary to unearth the truth. It is required to be noted
at this stage, that the Hon’ble Apex Court, in catena of
Page 9 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
judgments, has observed that the Court may reject the
application for anticipatory bail when the custodial
interrogation is deemed necessary, though the applicants
argue that such interrogation is not required. Further, the
custodial interrogation is not the sole determinant in denying
anticipatory bail, though is one of the factors for denial, as
the Courts will have to consider the others viz. severity of
the offence and the need for a detailed investigation. The
case on hand involves a huge scam involving huge sum of
government exchequer and the custodial interrogation of the
applicant is necessary to find out the material against the
accused persons, otherwise, the investigating agency may not
be able to put forward their case against the case,
ultimately, proving fatal to the prosecution case.
14. Considering the facts of the present case, there is prima
facie evidence against the applicant and the present case is
not extreme or exceptional case in which this Court has to
exercise discretion of granting pre-arrest bail in favour of the
applicant.
15. Further in Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. Aditya
Sarda, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 764 the Hon’ble Apex Court
held as follows:
Page 10 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
18. Now, so far as anticipatory bail is
concerned, this court has consistently
emphasized that anticipatory bail should not be
granted as a matter of routine, particularly in
serious economic offences, involving large scale
fraud, public money or complex financial crimes.
In P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of
Enforcement [(2019) 9 SCC 24; (2019) 3 SCC
(Cri) 509; 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1143.] , it was
observed as under [See page 57 of (2019) 9
SCC.] :
“Grant of anticipatory bail in exceptional cases
69. Ordinarily, arrest is a part of procedure of
the investigation to secure not only the
presence of the accused but several other
purposes. Power under section 438 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure is an extraordinary power
and the same has to be exercised sparingly.
The privilege of the pre-arrest bail should be
granted only in exceptional cases. The judicial
discretion conferred upon the court has to be
properly exercised after application of mind as
to the nature and gravity of the accusation;
possibility of the applicant fleeing justice and
other factors to decide whether it is a fit case
for grant of anticipatory bail…
Page 11 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
71. Article 21 of the Constitution of India
states that no person shall be deprived of his
life or personal liberty except according to
procedure prescribed by law. However, the
power conferred by article 21 of the
Constitution of India is not unfettered and is
qualified by the later part of the article, i.e.,
‘… except according to a procedure prescribed
by law’. In State of M.P. v. Ram Kishna
Balothia [(1995) 3 SCC 221; 1995 SCC (Cri)
439.] , the Supreme Court held that the right
of anticipatory bail is not a part of article 21
of the Constitution of India and held as
under : (SCC page 226, paragraph 7)‘7…. We find it difficult to accept the
contention that section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure is an integral part of article
21. In the first place, there was no provision
similar to section 438 in the old Criminal
Procedure Code. The Law Commission in its
41st report recommended introduction of a
provision for grant of anticipatory bail. It
observed:
“We agree that this would be a useful
advantage. Though we must add that it is in
very exceptional cases that such power shouldPage 12 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
be exercised.”‘
In the light of this recommendation, section 438
was incorporated, for the first time, in the
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. Looking to the
cautious recommendation of the Law
Commission, the power to grant anticipatory
bail is conferred only on a court of session or
the High Court. Also, anticipatory bail cannot
be granted as a matter of right. It is
essentially a statutory right conferred long after
the coming into force of the Constitution. It
cannot be considered as an essential ingredient
of article 21 of the Constitution. And its non-
application to a certain special category of
offences cannot be considered as violative of
article 21. (emphasis supplied)
72. We are conscious of the fact that the
legislative intent behind the introduction of
section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
is to safeguard the individual’s personal liberty
and to protect him from the possibility of being
humiliated and from being subjected to
unnecessary police custody. However, the court
must also keep in view that a criminal offence
is not just an offence against an individual,
rather the larger societal interest is at stake.
Page 13 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
Therefore, a delicate balance is required to be
established between the two rights–
safeguarding the personal liberty of an
individual and the societal interest. It cannot
be said that refusal to grant anticipatory bail
would amount to denial of the rights conferred
upon the appellant under article 21 of the
Constitution of India…
…
Economic offences
78. Power under section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure being an extraordinary
remedy, has to be exercised sparingly; more so,
in cases of economic offences. Economic offences
stand as a different class as they affect the
economic fabric of the society. In Directorate of
Enforcement v. Ashok Kumar Jain [(1998) 2
SCC 105; 1998 SCC (Cri) 510; 1998 SCC
OnLine SC 30.], it was held that in economic
offences, the accused is not entitled to
anticipatory bail.”
19. In Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy v. Central
Bureau of Investigation [(2013) 7 SCC 439;
(2013) 3 SCC (Cri) 552; 2013 SCC OnLine SC
Page 14 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
452.] , it was observed as under [ See page
449 of (2013) 7 SCC.] :
“34. Economic offences constitute a class apart
and need to be visited with a different
approach in the matter of bail. The economic
offences having deep-rooted conspiracies and
involving huge loss of public funds need to be
viewed seriously and considered as grave
offences affecting the economy of the country as
a whole and thereby posing serious threat to
the financial health of the country.
35. While granting bail, the court has to keep
in mind the nature of accusations, the nature
of evidence in support thereof, the severity of
the punishment which conviction will entail, the
character of the accused, circumstances which
are peculiar to the accused, reasonable
possibility of securing the presence of the
accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of
the witnesses being tampered with, the larger
interests of the public/State and other similar
considerations.”
20. In Nimmagadda Prasad v. Central Bureau
of Investigation [(2013) 7 SCC 466; (2013) 3
SCC (Cri) 575; 2013 SCC OnLine SC 454.] , it
was observed as under [ See page 474 of
Page 15 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
(2013) 7 SCC.] :
“23. Unfortunately, in the last few years, the
country has been seeing an alarming rise in
white-collar crimes, which has affected the fibre
of the country’s economic structure.
Incontrovertibly, economic offences have serious
repercussions on the development of the country
as a whole. In State of Gujarat v. Mohanlal
Jitamalji Porwal [(1987) 2 SCC 364; 1987 SCC
(Cri) 364; 1987 SCC OnLine SC 170.] this
court, while considering a request of the
prosecution for adducing additional evidence,
inter alia, observed as under : (SCC page 371,
paragraph 5)‘5…. The entire community is aggrieved if the
economic offenders who ruin the economy of the
State are not brought to book.
A murder may be committed in the heat of
moment upon passions being aroused. An
economic offence is committed with cool
calculation and deliberate design with an eye
on personal profit regardless of the
consequence to the community. A disregard
for the interest of the community can be
manifested only at the cost of forfeiting the
trust and faith of the community in the
Page 16 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
system to administer justice in an even-
handed manner without fear of criticism from
the quarters which view white-collar crimes
with a permissive eye unmindful of the
damage done to the national economy and
national interest.”
16. In the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs State
Of Maharashtra, reported in (2011) 1 SCC 694, the Hon’ble
Court held that life and personal liberty are the most prized
possessions of an individual but not at the cost of larger
interest of society and public. This is not a case, wherein
accused is falsely enraged in the offence with a view to
tarnish his image. Considering the fact that the custodial
interrogation is required. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case
of Jai Prakash Singh Vs State of Bihar & Anr. reported in
2012 4 SCC 379, has been pleased to hold as under:-
“Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a
serious offences are required to be satisfied and
further while granting such relief, the court must
record the reasons therefore. Anticipatory bail can
be granted only in exceptional circumstances where
the Court is prima facie of the view that the
applicant has falsely been enroped in the crime
and would not misuse his liberty.”
Page 17 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
17. It would be apposite to refer the judgment of the
Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in case of Pratibha Manchanda
vs. State of Haryana reported in AIR 2023 SC 3307, wherein
the Hon’ble Apex Court has observed thus:-
“19. The relief of Anticipatory Bail is aimed at
safeguarding individual rights. While it serves as a
crucial tool to prevent the misuse of the power of
arrest and protects innocent individuals from
harassment, it also presents challenges in
maintaining a delicate balance between individual
rights and the interests of justice. The tight rope
we must walk lies in striking a balance between
safeguarding individual rights and protecting public
interest. While the right to liberty and presumption
of innocence are vital, the court must also consider
the gravity of the offence, the impact on society,
and the need for a fair and free investigation. The
court’s discretion in weighing these interests in the
facts and circumstances of each individual case
becomes crucial to ensure a just outcome.”
18. In view of the aforesaid, I am of the considered opinion
that there is a prima facie case against the present applicant
in the alleged offence and granting anticipatory bail in favour
Page 18 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17277/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
undefined
of the applicant will hamper the investigation and
investigating agency and I do not find any exceptional
grounds to exercise discretion in favour of the applicant.
19. For the foregoing reasons and considering the law laid
down in the above cited decisions of this Court as well as
the Hon’ble Apex Court, this Court is of view that it is not
a fit case to exercise the discretion under Section 482 of
BNSS in favour of the applicant. Accordingly, present
application does not deserve any consideration and is hereby
dismissed. Rule is discharged.
20. It is made clear that the observations made in the
present order are tentative in nature.
(SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)
SRILATHA
Page 19 of 19
Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:20:54 IST 2026
