IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE CHARGESHEET) NO. 5984 of 2026 ==========================================================

MOHMED TASIN ABDULRAJJAK KURESHI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR. SOEB R. BHOHARIA(2205) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 VALIMOHAMMED PATHAN(6383) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR TRUPESH KATHIRIYA ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL Date : 11/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Soed Bhoharia appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Trupesh Kathiriya 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. 11191043260033 of 2026 registered with Shahpur Police Station, Ahmedabad City, for the offence punishable under Sections 325, 54 of the BNS and Sections 5, 6, 6(A), 6B(1), 8(1), 8(3), 8(4) of the Animal Preservation Act and under Sections 335 and 392 of the BPMC 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 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 obje5272cted 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, 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) The allegation in the FIR that the applicant had dealt in the prohibited substance – meat of cow progeny.

(ii) While it would appear that the recovery i.e. of approximately 350 Kg. of that prohibited material from the premises, which was of the premises of the present applicant and whereas while the role of the present applicant becomes very clear in so far as the offence is concerned, yet having regard to a certificate issued by one Sushrusha Navneet Memorial Hospital dated 01.03.2026, which is verified by the Investigating Officer that the mother of the present applicant is terminally ill and is in her last stage of the life, this Court is 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 the applicant 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. No.11191043260033 of 2026 registered with Shahpur Police Station, Ahmedabad City, on executing a bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty 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 liberty;

[b] not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;

[c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a wee