IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 24779 of 2025 ==========================================================

KISHAN @ KRISHNA KARSHANBHAI SARVADIYA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

A R SHAH(7768) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR ADITYA JADEJA ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)

No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL Date : 17/12/2025

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Shaival Patel for learned advocate Mr. A.R. Shah appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Aditya Jadeja appearing on behalf of the respondent- State. Learned advocate Ms. Yatri Trivedi submits that she has instructions to appear on behalf of the complainant and she may be permitted to file her Vakalatnama. She would submit that the complainant is present in the Court and tendered the affidavit of the complainant, which is ordered to be taken on record.

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.11211009250551/2025 registered with Chotila Police Station, Dist. Surendranagar, for the offence punishable under Sections 87, 137(2), 64(2(I), 64(2)(M), 65(1) of BNS and Section 3(A), 4,5, (L), 6,12 of the POCSO Act.

4. Learned advocate 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 since 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 all the conditions that may be imposed by this Court if released on bail.

5. As against the same, learned Additional Public Prosecutor 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. I have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the papers. Following aspects are considered:

(i) As per the averments in the FIR and investigation papers and as per the contention of the parties, the present appears to be a case of love affair.

(ii) The age of the prosecutrix being 15 years and 10 months and the age of applicant being 19 years and whereas it appears that the parties have settled the matter inter se, considering the same, this Court inclined to consider this application.

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

7. 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.

8. 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. 11211009250551/2025 registered with Chotila Police Station, Dist. Surendranagar, on executing a bond of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;

[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse li