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) 18001

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Hasmukh D. Suthar, J
Nareshbhai Narshibhai Sakariya – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
R/CR.MA/11326/2026 | R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 11326 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Nayankumar V Shukla
For the Respondents: J A Jambukiya, H K Patel

The grant of bail is governed by the principle that liberty is the rule and detention the exception. Courts must evaluate the investigation status, criminal antecedents, risk of witness tampering, and trial duration, ensuring that pre-trial confinement does not function as an unwarranted punitive measure for the accused.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 483 - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act - Regular bail - Factors for consideration - Court to consider nature of accusation, severity of punishment, possibility of tampering with witnesses, and potential for abscondence - Principle that "bail is a rule and jail is an exception" based on the constitutional guarantee of personal liberty. (Paras 6, 8)

(B) Bail - Grant of - Relevant factors - Investigation concluded and charge sheet filed - Age gap between victim and accused - Lack of prior criminal antecedents - Absence of property or evidence to be recovered - Prolonged pre-trial incarceration without reasonable prospects of immediate trial constitutes pre-trial conviction - Judicial discretion exercised to grant liberty subject to strict conditions. (Paras 7, 9)

Facts of the case:
The applicant initiated an application for regular bail after being charged with multiple offenses concerning a minor, following the completion of the investigation and the filing of a formal charge sheet. The applicant, a young adult, had been detained for several months, and the prosecution opposed the request, citing the gravity of the allegations.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the investigation was finalized and the risks regarding witness tampering or abscondence were mitigated by imposing specific conditions. Given the absence of criminal history and the expectation that the trial would be protracted, the court determined that continued detention was disproportionate.

Issues: The main issue addressed was whether the applicant met the criteria for release on regular bail, balancing the gravity of the charges against the fundamental right to personal liberty in view of the current status of the investigative proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi: Bail is a rule and jail is an exception; where the investigation is complete, trial is likely to be delayed, and the applicant has no prior criminal history, the interest of justice favors release on bail to prevent unnecessary pre-trial punishment, provided the applicant adheres to conditions ensuring the integrity of the judicial process.

Result: Application for regular bail allowed.

ORDER

[1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.

[2.0] The present application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11211010260031 of 2026 registered with Chuda Police Station, Surendranagar for the offences punishable under Section 137(2), 87, 64(2)(i)(m) of the BNS and Sections 4(1), 6(1) and 12 of the POCSO Act.

[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence. No antecedent is reported against the applicant. He therefore submits that, considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.

[5.0] Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State and learned advocate Mr.J.A. Jambukia appearing on behalf of the original complainant have opposed the present application and submitted that present applicant is involved in the offence. Hence, they ahve requested to dismiss the present application for regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.

[6.0] While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the accused in the alleged offence, the jurisdiction to grant bail has to be exercised on the basis of the well settled principles having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case and the following factors are to be taken into consideration while considering an application for bail:

(i) the nature of accusation and the severity of the punishment and the nature of the materials relied upon by the prosecution;

(ii) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses and threat to the complainant or the witnesses;

(iii) reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the time of trial or the likelihood of his abscondence;

(iv) character behaviour and standing of the accused and the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused;

(v) larger interest of the public or the State and similar other considerations are required to be considered.

[7.0] I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the investigation papers. Following aspects have been considered:

(1) investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed;

(2) age of the victim is approximate 16 years, while age of the applicant is 21 years;

(3) None of the offence alleged is punishable with life sentence or death penalty;

(4) Applicant is behind the bars since 23.02.2026;

(5) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant;

(6) No antecedent is reported against the applicant;

(7) commencement of trial will take its own time;

[8.0] This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012]1 SCC 40 as well as in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1978)1 SCC 240. Obviously, the conclusion of trial will take time and keeping the accused behind the bars is nothing but amounts to pre-trial conviction and therefore, considering the celebrated principle of bail jurisprudence is that “bail is a rule and jail is exception” as well as the concept of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, present application deserves consideration.

[9.0] In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the FIR, 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. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11211010260031 of 2026 registered with Chuda Police S

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