IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE CHARGESHEET) NO. 5052 of 2026 ==========================================================

VIJAYKUMAR @BHUVAJI KHANABHAI KARAMSIBHAI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR. JV PADHIYAR(6966) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS. HETAL V SANKHALA(15409) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR HARDIK MEHTA ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)

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

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL Date : 10/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. J.V. Padhiyar appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Hardik 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. 11996003260100 of 2026 registered with Deodar Police Station, Dist. Banaskantha, for the offence punishable under Sections 69, 64(2)(m), 64(2)(f), 351(2)(3) of the BNS.

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 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, 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 being that the applicant had coerced the victim into establishing physical relationship and whereas it would appear to this Court that the applicant herein and the complainant may have had an extramarital relationship and later on, for reasons best known to the complainant, the present FIR is filed.

(ii) The fact of the FIR itself narrating that the complainant going along with the applicant to various hotels at the behest of the applicant.

(iii) The fact of applicant himself being a distant relative of the complainant and whereas while the coercion could be alleged once when offence continues over a period of time, then prima facie, it C would appear to this ourt that the same is a continuing extramarital relationship.

(iv) The fact of the co-accused having been released by this Court vide order dated 09.03.2026 and whereas this Court having noticed that the relationship with the present applicant, may be a case of extramarital affair.

(v) The fact of the applicant being in custody since 10.02.2026 and having no antecedents.

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.11996003260100 of 2026 registered with Deodar Police Station, Dist. Banaskantha, on executing a bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfa