IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -

AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 22810 of 2025 ==========================================================

KOMALBEN @ MATAJI W/O JAYPALSINH RANJITSINH RATHOD Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

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

Appearance:

K T BELADIYA(9101) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR H K PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 SANKUL K KABRA(9304) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY Date : 18/12/2025

ORAL ORDER

1. 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. 11192061250429 of 2025 registered with Viramgam Town Police Station, Ahmedabad.

2. Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant and learned APP for the Respondent – State.

Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the Respondent - State.

3. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the Applicant has good reputation in the society and 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.

4. Per contra, learned APP has opposed the present application for grant of regular bail contending that the present applicant had lured the first informant for some godly blessings and had collected the amount of Rs. 67 Lacs from him. It was also promised that his shop would not be demolished by the Municipal Authorities for being an encroachment on the road. He further submits that out of the amount of Rs. 67 Lacs, Rs. 12 Lacs has been recovered. The other co-accused are still at large. He therefore submitted to dismiss the present application . Learned APP has therefore submitted that looking to the nature of offence, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant and the Application may be dismissed.

5. Learned Advocate appearing for the complainant has also opposed the application contending that the amount of Rs. 67 Lacs has been received by the applicant herein under the guise of providing some godly blessings to the first informant. The said amount is yet to be recovered and the other co-accused are still absconding. He therefore submitted to dismiss the present application.

6. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the record. The investigation is over and charge sheet is filed. As per the case of the prosecution, the role attributed to the Applicant is to the effect that the amount of Rs. 67 Lacs has been collected by the applicant and the other co-accused from the first informant by promising that they would not allow his shop to be demolished by the Municipal Authority by some godly interference and the said amount has been subsequently used for some personal purposes. Having regard to the nature of offence and the allegations levelled against the Applicant deserves consideration. This court has also considered the following aspects:

(a) As per catena of decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, there are mainly 3 factors which are required to be considered by this court i.e. prima facie case, availability of Applicant accused at the time of trial and tampering and hampering with the witnesses by the accused.

(b) That the learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the Applicant Accused is not likely to flee away.

(c) That the Applicant is in custody since 06.08.2025.

(d) The law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v.

C.B.I. Reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40.

7. Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties and perusing the record produced in this case as well as taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, gravity of accusation, availability of t