IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 6549 of 2026 ========================================================== MANSUKHBHAI DHANJIBHAI PARMAR (NAME AS PER SESSIONS COURT ORDER)

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

Appearance:

MR S D MOGHARIYA(11273) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR. KRUTIK PARIKH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE UTKARSH THAKORBHAI DESAI Date : 18/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned APP 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. 11189003251984 of 2025 registered with A Division Morbi City Police Station, Morbi for the offence punishable under Sections

61(2), 319, 337, 338, 340(2) of the BNS, 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, further incarceration of the applicant will not benefit the Investigation Officer in any manner. 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 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 applicant is a permanent resident of Morbi, hence would be available at the time of trial;

ii. The applicant does not have any criminal antecedents;

iii. The applicant though has three antecedents against him only one pertains to offence under the BNS, 2023 of identical nature;

iv. The allegation against the applicant is about he had been entered into conspiracy with the other co-accused whereby the co-accused Darshit having prepared the forged aadhar card and pan card of the original owner of the land namely Talshibhai Bhagwanji father of the complainant.

v. Before the alleged sale deed could be executed the accused no. 1 Amitbhai was apprehended and after two days the present applicant came to be apprehended.

vi. The land in question is in possession of the original owner as on today.

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. 11189003251984 of 2025 registered with ‘A’ Division Morbi City Police Station, Morbi, on executing a bail 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 liberty or misuse liberty;

[b] not act in a manne