IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 1835 of 2026 ========================================================

RUTVIK BACHUBHAI KHANDEKA (RUTVIK BHACHUBHAI KHANDEKA)

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================

Appearance:

MR S D MOGHARIYA(11273) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR ADITYA JADEJA ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL Date : 20/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. S.D. Moghariya on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Aditya Jadeja on behalf of the respondent-State.

2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent-State.

3. The present applicant who has been arraigned as an accused has preferred 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.11195010250793 of 2025 registered with Palanpur West Police Station, District: Banaskantha for the offences punishable under Sections 8(C),20(b)(ii)B and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’) after filing of the charge-sheet more particularly the application preferred by the applicant having been rejected by the learned Trial Court.

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. This Court has heard learned Advocates for the respective parties and perused the FIR including the charge-sheet papers as well as order passed by learned Session Court as well as affidavit filed by the investigating officer before the learned Trial Court. Following aspects are considered:

(i) The allegation being very serious i.e the accused was transacting in contraband- Cannabis.

(ii) It would appear that the Cannabis as per the FIR, was weighing approximately 19.952 grams, i.e below commercial quantity, upon the same having been submitted before the learned Magistrate for inventory, after three days of the FIR, the weight was found to be 20.42 Kilogram that is commercial quantity resulting in an application being filed for addition of offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii) (c) of the NDPS Act. Thus prima facie there is a discrepancy with regard to whether the contraband was of commercial quantity or not and whether offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act could be invoked at all.

(iii) Be that as it may, this Court has also considered the fact that applicant, was caught red handed in a vehicle, which was being driven by a friend of the present applicant with the contraband in question.

(iv) Furthermore the FIR, itself reflects that the applicant and the co-accused, who was driving the vehicle in question had gone to Poshina, procured the contraband and were intending to sell it on retail basis.

(v) Having observed as above yet, this Court has considered fact that the applicant is aged around 22 years, having no antecedents, arrested on 23.09.2025 and the charge-sheet having been l