IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE CHARGESHEET) NO. 5505 of 2026 ==========================================================

ASHOKKUMAR BHIKHABHAI CHAUHAN Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

O I PATHAN(7684) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR LB DABHI ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

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

1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Ruzin S.Zeena for learned advocate Mr.O.I.Pathan 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. 11206002260030 of 2026 registered with Visnagar Taluka Police Station, District: Mehsana for the offence punishable under Sections 108, 54 of the B.N.S. 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 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. Allegation being that the accused had abated the deceased in committing suicide.

ii. The deceased being husband of accused No.1 and whereas the present applicant not being named in the FIR.

iii.The present applicant being a distant relative and whereas the allegation being that the accused along with the present applicant, had mentally tortured and quarreled with the deceased which had led the deceased in committing the act in question.

iv.Prima faice, it appears that the quarrel, referred to may have been a domestic quarrel, more particularly, it would appear that the deceased and the accused No.1 were married since the year 2011 and whereas, it also appears that from the said wedlock, two children have been born, aged 12 and 6 years.

v. The allegation against the present applicant even as per the investigation till now, revealing that the role attributed to the present applicant was of having joined the other accused in quarrelling with the deceased. No specific allegation thereafter.

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. 11206002260030 of 2026 registered with Visnagar Taluka Police Station, District: Mehsana, 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