The Gujarat High Court, on March 21, granted anticipatory bail to journalist Mahesh Langa, who was booked under charges of corruption, criminal conspiracy, and theft. The case revolves around allegations that Langa obtained "highly confidential government documents" belonging to the Gujarat Maritime Board (GMB).

However, Langa is currently in judicial custody in an unrelated case concerning alleged GST fraud. His regular bail plea had been previously rejected by the High Court.

Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar, while delivering the order, observed:

Read Also:- SC Collegium Proposes Eight New Judges for Gujarat High Court

"...Prima facie, it appears that the present applicant is not a government servant. In aid of Section 8 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, he is arraigned as an accused for abetting an offence. The applicant has been arrested in another offence under GST allegations, but he has preferred the present anticipatory bail. In view of Dhanraj Aswani v/s Amar S. Mulchandani (2024), there is no bar to entertaining anticipatory bail of an accused in judicial custody."

The court clarified that it was considering the case only for anticipatory bail and not for any other aspect of the ongoing proceedings. A coordinate bench had earlier refused to quash the FIR against Langa, stating that a prima facie offence was made out.

Justice Suthar also stressed that courts must consider multiple factors while deciding anticipatory bail applications, including personal liberty, the nature of allegations, and larger public interest.

Read Also:- Supreme Court's Ruling Awaited: Gujarat & Karnataka High Courts Halt Civil Judges' Recruitment

Allegations Against Mahesh Langa

The court noted that Langa, a journalist, allegedly received information from the Gujarat Maritime Board (GMB). It stated:

"Perusing the record, it appears that the present applicant managed to receive information from GMB. He came into contact with one employee of GMB and, by gaining his trust, obtained information related to the extension of contracts for three ports. After receiving an envelope containing documents, he allegedly gave a 'gift' to the said employee."

The court observed that while the investigation confirmed the handover of an envelope, there was no clear evidence indicating that it contained confidential government documents. It further noted that if a GMB employee leaked or provided such information, it would be a violation of civil service conduct rules, and the employee would face disciplinary consequences.

The court remarked that the provisions of the Official Secrets Act had not been invoked in this case, despite the alleged sensitivity of the information. Regarding the Prevention of Corruption Act, the court stated:

"Offering illegal gratification is a cognizable offence. Even a mere attempt under Section 7(a) (Offence relating to public servant being bribed) of the PC Act is punishable. However, there is no evidence suggesting that the present applicant provided illegal gratification to collect information. The statements indicate that he only gave a 'gift'."

The court acknowledged that the Gujarat CCS (Conduct) Rules allow government servants to accept gifts within prescribed limits. It emphasized that in the absence of any proof that the gift was given as illegal gratification, it could not be assumed that Langa committed any criminal misconduct.

Further, the court reiterated:

"Even in cases of conspiracy, direct evidence is rarely available. The court must infer from surrounding circumstances. However, in the present case, keeping a copy of the information does not amount to an offence."

The court also pointed out that there was no evidence of wrongful loss to the government or harm to the larger public interest due to Langa’s actions. It noted:

Read Also:- Supreme Court Refuses Bail to Former Gujarat IAS Officer Pradeep Sharma in Land Allotment Corruption Case

"No one has filed a complaint stating that they suffered any loss due to the applicant’s actions. In the absence of evidence suggesting criminal misconduct or illegal gratification, rejecting the anticipatory bail application is not justified."

Justice Suthar, referring to Supreme Court precedents, emphasized that bail applications must be decided on their own merits rather than solely relying on prior judicial pronouncements. The court also observed that since the documents had already been seized by authorities, there was no need for custodial interrogation.

The order stated:

"Nothing is to be recovered from the accused as the documents were seized by the authority. The applicant is ready to join the investigation. As the offence is punishable up to seven years, the application deserves consideration."

The court further acknowledged that journalists are not required to disclose their sources, as per Supreme Court rulings, and thus, custodial interrogation was unnecessary. Langa’s counsel confirmed that he was willing to cooperate with the investigation.

Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail to Mahesh Langa.

Case Title: Maheshan Prabhudan Langa vs State of Gujarat & Ors.

Case Number: R/CR.MA/5680/2025

Legal Sections Involved:

• BNS Sections 316(5) (Criminal Breach of Trust by public servants, bankers, merchants, and other professionals), 303(2) (Theft), 306 (Theft by clerk or servant of property in possession of master), 61(2) (Criminal conspiracy)
• Prevention of Corruption Act Sections 7(a) (Undue advantage to influence a public servant), 8 (Bribing a public servant), 12 (Punishment for abetment of offences), 13(1)(a) (Criminal misconduct by a public servant), 13(2) (Punishment for a public servant who commits criminal misconduct)