SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 14076

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
M. R. Mengdey, J
ASHVINBHAI CHHANABHAI DABHIV/sSTATE OF GUJARAT
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 6317 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Armankhan A Ghasura
For the Respondents: Ms Dhwani Tripathi

The court granted regular bail based on the principle of parity with a co-accused and the fact that the investigation was complete (charge sheet filed), while considering the accused's availability for trial and lack of risk to witnesses.

Headnote:(A) Bail - Regular Bail - Parity - Where a co-accused with a similar role has been granted bail by the Hon'ble Apex Court, the applicant is entitled to bail on the grounds of parity, especially after the charge sheet has been filed. (Para 5)

(B) Bail - Factors for Consideration - The court must primarily consider the prima facie case, the availability of the accused at the time of trial, and the potential for tampering or hampering of witnesses. (Para 5)

Issues: Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail considering the completion of investigation and parity with a co-accused.

Table of Content
1. procedural initiation of a regular bail application under bnss. (Para 1 , 2)
2. competing arguments regarding the applicant's reputation versus the nature of the offence. (Para 3 , 4)
3. application of the principle of parity and standard factors for granting bail. (Para 5)
4. grant of bail subject to specific conditions to ensure trial attendance and public order. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)

ORDER

1. 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.11198006241765 of 2024 registered with Ghogha Road Police Station, Bhavnagar.

2. Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant and learned APP for the Respondent – State.

Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the Respondent - State.

3. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the Applicant has good reputation in the society and 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.

4. Per contra, learned APP has opposed the present application for grant of regular bail contending that the present applicant has been actively involved in commission of the offence in question. Learned APP has therefore submitted that looking to the nature of offence, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant and the Application may be dismissed.

5. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the record. The investigation is over and charge sheet is filed. The applicant had earlier preferred Criminal Misc. Application No.6852 of 2025 which was allowed to be withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 12.06.2025. However, thereafter, the Hon’ble Apex Court has considered the case of the other co-accused namely Sanjaybhai Narshibhai Bambhaniya for grant of bail vide order dated 17.09.2025. The role attributed to the present applicant and the said co-accused Sanjaybhai is more or less similar. Having regard to these aspects, the Application deserves consideration. This court has also considered the following aspects:

(a) As per catena of decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, there are mainly 3 factors which are required to be considered by this court i.e. prima facie case, availability of Applicant accused at the time of trial and tampering and hampering with the witnesses by the accused.

(b) That the learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the Applicant Accused is not likely to flee away.

(c) That the Applicant is in custody since 13.10.2024.

(d) The law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. C.B.I. Reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40.

6. Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties and perusing the record produced in this case as well as taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, gravity of accusation, availability of the Applicant Accused at the time of Trial etc. and the role attributed to the present Applicant accused, the present Application deserves to be allowed and accordingly stands allowed. This Court has also gone through the FIR and police papers and also the earlier order passed by the learned Sessions Court where the learned Sessions Judge has disallowed the bail Application at initial stage. The Applicant Accused is ordered to be released on bail in connection with the aforesaid FIR on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, subject to the following conditions that he shall:

(a) not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence.

(b) maintain law a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top