IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 1421 of 2026 ==========================================================

SMIT PANKAJBHAI PATEL Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR RAHUL RAJHANS(12788) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR L B DABHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL Date : 06/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Rahul Rajhans appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. L.B. Dabhi 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. 11215017250202 of 2025 registered with Mahelav Police Station, District Anand, for the offence punishable under Sections 316(5) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

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. Allegation being that the applicant had defrauded the complainant and other victims by promising Visa to the United States.

ii. Prima facie it would appear that the applicant had received approximately Rs. 30,00,000/- in his bank account, which was from the complainant and/or the victims.

iii. The fact of the applicant being in custody since 09.09.2025 and the charge-sheet having been filed by the Investigating Officer.

iv. This Court has also taken into consideration the submission made by learned Advocate for the applicant that the applicant, without prejudice to his rights and contentions, is ready and willing to deposit an amount of Rs.20,00,000/- with the learned Trial Court, i.e. Rs.5,00,000/- as pre-deposit and Rs. 15,00,000/- within a period of five months after his release on bail.

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 FIR being C.R. No. 11215017250202 of 2025 registered with Mahelav Police Station, District Anand, on depositing an amount of Rs.500,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh Only) as a pre-condition for release on bail with the learned Trial Court and 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 where