IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 27176 of 2025 ==========================================================

PATVARI KASHIRAM JAGDISH GODIYA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR ANIL H RATHOD(9691) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR NIRAJ SHARMA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL Date : 06/03/2026 ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Anil Rathod appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Niraj Sharma appearing on behalf of the respondent-State. Though served, none appears for the respondent no. 2.

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. 11208052250611 of 2025 registered with Bhaktinagar Police Station, Rajkot for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2) (m) and 69 of B.N.S. and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012.

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. Prima facie, the present appears to be a case of love relationship, though there is an age gap between the parties, the prosecutrix is appearing to be aged around 16 years and the applicant is aged around 28 years.

ii. It would also appear, that there was no element of force, threat or coercion is involved, more particularly, the prosecutrix having eloped with the applicant and having stayed with him for a substantial period of time, both at U.P. i.e. at a relatives place and in the house of the present applicant at Nepal.

iii. It would also appear that the prosecutrix has also not stated about any force etc. and the prosecutrix admit the fact of her relationship even in statement under Section 183 under the BNSS to the Magistrate.

iv. This Court has also considered the fact that the applicant is in custody since 14.10.2025 and the charge-sheet is filed.

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. 11208052250611 of 2025 registered with Bhaktinagar Police Station, Rajkot, on executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ru