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) 22920

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
M. R. Mengdey, J
Brijrajsinh Udesinh Chauhan – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
R/CR.MA/19006/2026 | R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 19006 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Divyang A Ramani
For the Respondents: Dhwani Tripathi

The court granted regular bail by evaluating the prima facie case, the accused's likelihood of appearing at trial, and the risk of witness tampering, adhering to the principles established in Sanjay Chandra v. C.B.I.

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure - Regular 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 with witnesses. (Para 6)

(B) Bail Conditions - Imposition of Restrictions - To ensure the presence of the accused and maintain law and order, the court may impose conditions including the submission of address proof, periodic reporting to the police station, and surrender of passports. (Para 7)

Issues: Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

Table of Content
1. application for regular bail under section 483 of bnss. (Para 1 , 2)
2. competing arguments regarding the applicant's reputation versus alleged involvement in the offence. (Para 3 , 4)
3. application of the three-factor test for bail: prima facie case, availability, and witness tampering. (Para 5 , 6)
4. granting of bail subject to strict conditions to ensure trial attendance and public order. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)

ORDER

1. The applicant has filed this Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for enlarging the applicant on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11191015250484 of 2025 registered with Nikol Police Station, District:Ahmedabad City.

2. Heard learned advocate appearing for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the Respondent – State.

2.1 Rule. Learned PP waives service 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, the application is opposed by learned APP for the respondent contending that the present applicant is actively involved in commission of the offence in question. He therefore submitted to dismiss the present application.

5. This Court has considered the submissions canvassed by learned advocates for the parties and has also perused the material placed on record. Having regard to the seriousness of the offence alleged against the applicant and the role played by him in commission of the offence in question, the application deserves consideration. Considering the same, the application deserves consideration.

6. This court has 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 judicial custody.

(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.

7. 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 the applicant 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 and order and not to indulge in any criminal activities.

(c) furnish the documentary proof of complete, correct and present address of residence to the Investigating Officer and to the Trial Court at the time of executing the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of the trial Court.

(d) provide contact numbers 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