IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -

AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 3576 of 2026 ==========================================================

MANISHKUMAR SHIVLAL CHAUHAN Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR. MAHAMMADTOHID M. SINDHI(18283) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR.MINHAJ M SHAIKH(6847) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS.DILBUR CONTRACTOR(6388) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR J K SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL Date : 01/04/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Minhaj M. Shaikh appearing on behalf of the applicant, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. J.K. Shah appearing on behalf of the respondent-State and learned Advocate Ms. Dilbur Contractor appearing on behalf of the original complainant.

2. 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. 11188009251092 of 2025 registered with Modasa Town Police Station, District Aravalli, for the offence punishable under Sections 75(2) and 78(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. Learned Advocate Mr. Shaikh 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.

3.1 Learned Advocate Mr. Minhaj Shaikh on behalf of the applicant would further submit that while the allegation is that the applicant had ensured that the victim would fail in the subject in which the applicant was teaching, yet, as per the deposition of the complainant in the trial, it would appear that the present applicant was not teaching the victim at all. Learned Advocate would submit that as such, the complainant has turned hostile before the learned Trial Court and whereas she has resiled from her statement given before the Investigating Officer and whereas under such circumstances, this Court may consider and release the present applicant on regular bail.

4. 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.

4.1 Learned APP would draw the attention of this Court to the statement of the victim under Section 183 of the BNSS and whereas learned APP would submit that the victim has stood by her version as stated before the Investigating Officer.

4.2 Learned APP would further submit that as such, apart from the papers which were part of the charge-sheet, list of documents were also pressed in service before the learned Trial Court, more particularly the same having been submitted before the learned Trial Court on

11.02.2026.

4.3 From the above referred documents which were part of the D.E. List, learned APP would also draw the attention of this Court to an apology letter by the present applicant before the school management, more particularly whereby the present applicant has apologized for his behaviour with two students including the present victim, more particularly for having entered into inappropriate whats-app messages with the said students.

4.4 Learned APP would further submit that as such, considering that the present applicant has been arrested on 26.11.2025 and the trial being in progress, th