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)(SC) 603

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.B. Pardiwala, K.V. Viswanathan, JJ
Vanubhai Amarshibhai Dantani – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 4377/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ch. Leela Sarveswar, Saurabh Gupta, C Raghavendren, C Rubavathi, K Gopinath, G Munisamy, M. A. Chinnasamy
For the Respondents: Swati Ghildiyal, Nimesh Bhati

The court may exercise its discretion to grant bail to an undertrial prisoner when the trial is delayed, a large number of witnesses remain to be examined, and parity exists with co-accused who have already been released.

Headnote:The petitioner filed a Special Leave Petition challenging the denial of regular bail by the High Court. The petitioner has been an undertrial prisoner since 2023 in connection with an FIR involving charges of murder and other offences under the Indian Penal Code and the Gujarat Police Act. The Court noted that despite the filing of a chargesheet, the trial has not commenced, and the prosecution intends to examine forty witnesses, likely leading to a long duration. The core issue was whether the petitioner is entitled to bail given the potential delay in trial and parity with co-accused who have already been granted bail. The Court observed that while the petitioner contributed to procedural delays, the prolonged incarceration without the commencement of the trial and the fact that other co-accused were enlarged on bail warranted a discretionary grant of bail. The Court ordered that the petitioner be released on bail forthwith, subject to conditions imposed by the trial court, and disposed of the petition.

Table of Content
1. factual background of the custody and charges faced. (Para 1)
2. observation on trial delay and parity with co-accused. (Para 3 , 5 , 6 , 7)
3. grant of bail based on judicial discretion. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)

O R D E R

1. The petitioner has been denied regular bail by the High Court in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11191044230339 of 2023 registered with the Ghatlodiya Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 307, 394, 323, 504, 34, 114 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”), respectively and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act. 2. It appears that upon completion of the investigation, chargesheet was filed against the present petitioner and two other co-accused. The filing of the chargesheet culminated in Sessions Case No. 129 of 2024 pending as on date in the Court of 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad.

3. We heard Mr.Saurabh Gupta, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, the learned counsel appearing for the State of Gujarat. 4. We take notice of the fact that the petitioner is in custody as an under trial prisoner since 2023. It is true that time was consumed by the petitioner himself in engaging his defence counsel and that probably has led to delay in the commencement of the trial. However, prima facie it appears that there was an altercation between the deceased and the accused persons and in the course of the altercation the petitioner is alleged to have gone inside his house and picked up a stick and hit a blow on the head of the deceased.

5. Having regard to the genesis of the occurrence and the fact that not a single witness has been examined so far, trial may take a considerable long period of time before it is concluded.

6. We are informed by the learned counsel appearing for the State that prosecution intends to examine as many as 40 witnesses.

7. Besides, the other co-accused have already been enlarged on bail.

8. In the overall view of the matter, we are persuaded to exercise our discretion in favour of the petitioner. We order that the petitioner be released on bail forthwith, if not required in any other offence subject to terms and conditions that the Trial Court may deem fit to impose.

9. In view of the aforesaid, the Special Leave Petition stands disposed of.

10. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

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