IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 24214 of 2025 ==========================================================

SALIMBHAI ISHAKBHAI SUMBHANIYA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

NABIL O BLOCH(7953) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR JAY A MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL Date : 24/11/2025 ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Nabil O. Bloch, appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.

Jay Mehta, appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.

2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent-State.

3. The applicant has filed this application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the applicant on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.

11185004251144/2025 registered with Jam Khambhaliya Police Station, Dev Bhumi Dwarka for the offence punishable under Sections 8(2), 8(4) and 10 of Gujarat Animal Preservation Act, 2017. 4. Learned advocate Mr. Bloch for the applicant would submit that considering the role attributed to the applicant, and nature of the allegation levelled, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet is filed no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in jail for indefinite period. It is further contended that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court if released on bail.

5. As against the same, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Mehta appearing for the respondent – State has vehemently objected to the grant of regular bail. Learned APP has submitted that looking to the nature of offence and the role attributed to the present applicant as coming out from the charge-sheet, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant and the application may be dismissed.

6. Having regard to the fact that the applicant has prayed for grant of regular bail, learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for further reasoned order.

7. I have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the papers. Following aspects are considered:-

i. The applicant stated to be a purchaser of the prohibited material (meat of progeny of cow) weighing around 26 kgs.

ii. The fact that the applicant is not the person who had been involved in slaughtering the animal in question.

iii. The fact that the applicant has no antecedents of being involved in such activity and whereas, the present being a second FIR, insofaras the first FIR, the same also was with regard to the very transaction where this Court has enlarged the applicant on regular bail vide an order dated 19.11.2025 in Criminal MISC. Application No. 24005 of 2025;

iv. The fact of investigation being over and the Investigating Officer having laid the charge-sheet;

This Court has taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012] 1 SCC 40.

8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against in the First Information Report, without discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.

9. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in connection with F.I.R. registered as C.R. No. 11185004251144/2025 registered with Jam Khambhaliya Police Station, Dev Bhumi Dwarka, on executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousands only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that she shall;

[a]