IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 3803 of 2026 ==========================================================

HARIBHAI @ GOPALBHAI DAHYABHAI BHARVAD Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR P P MAJMUDAR(5284) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR NIRAJ SHARMA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL Date : 24/02/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Majmudar appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.Sharma 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.11195019250917 of 2025 registered with Deesa Rural Police Station, Banaskantha, for the offence punishable under Sections 3(5), 178, 179, 180, 181, 111(3)(4) and 61 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 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. The allegation in the FIR being very serious inasmuch as the accused had printed fake currency and were in the process of trying to introduce the fake currency note into the market.

ii. While a total of 7684 notes of denomination of Rs.500/- had been recovered from accused named in the FIR, no recovery had been made from the present applicant.

iii. The role of the present applicant is being revealed as per the statement given by co-accused one Sanjay Soni, who had, inter alia, stated that the present applicant had contacted the said persons hereinbefore with other customers who were inclined to transact in fake currency notes.

No fake currency note found from the present applicant.

iv. The allegation being that the applicant was in touch with the accused Sanjay Soni on Whatsapp, not reflecting anything, since the call details would reflect calls being made and whereas would not reflect the nature of the call.

v. The applicant being in custody since 12.09.2025, charge-sheet having been laid and the applicant not having any antecedents whatsoever.

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 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.11195019250917 of 2025 registered with Deesa Rural Police Station, Banaskantha, on executing a bond of R