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

AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 5337 of 2026 ==========================================================

JHANHUSEN ZAKIRHUSAN KHALIFA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MS RENU VERMA(5964) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR DHAWAN JAYSWAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY Date : 12/03/2026

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.11215002240941 of 2024 registered with Anand Town Police Station, Anand.

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 quantity of the contraband substance involved in the present offence is a commercial quantity and therefore, in view of the recent judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of 2025 Union of India v. Vigin K Varghese reported in LiveLaw (SC) 1101, mere delay in trial cannot be the ground for grant of bail in the cases involving contraband substance in the commercial quantity. 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. 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 other co-accused was found in possession of the contraband substance of Ganja worth 79 kgs. It is the case of the prosecution against the applicant that the applicant had acted in the supply-chain which has reached to other co-accused who was found in conscious possession of the contraband substance. However, except the statement of the co- accused and some call details indicating the telephonic conversation between the present applicant and the other co- accused, there is no other material connecting the present applicant with the offence in question. Having regard to these aspects, the Application 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 08.02.2025.

(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.

6. 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 the Applicant Accused at the time of Trial etc. and the role attributed to the present Applicant accused, the present Application deserves to be allowed and accordingly stands allowed. This Court has also gone through the FIR and police papers and also the earlier order passed by the learned Sessions Court where the learned Sessions Judge has disallowed the bail Applicati