SUNIL ZENDU MALIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- HASMUKH D SUTHAR
Holding
The Court held that regular bail should be granted to the applicant.
Summary
The High Court of Gujarat considered an application for regular bail filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by Sunil Zendu Mali, who was charged under IPC sections 406, 420, 114, 120(B), 409 and Gujarat Prevention of Interest of Depositors Act sections 3 and 7. The applicant, a former director of a cooperative society, claimed innocence and argued that the investigation was complete, no property needed to be recovered, and that co‑accused had already been released on bail. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The Court examined standard bail factors, noted that none of the charges carried life or death penalty, and relied on Supreme Court precedents emphasizing bail as a rule and personal liberty under Article 21. Concluding that the case was suitable for bail, the Court granted regular bail on a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with several conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted after the filing of a charge‑sheet for offences under IPC and the GPID Act.
- Whether the nature of the offences and the applicant's background justify denial of bail.
- Whether there is a risk of tampering with evidence or absconding that warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860s. 114, s. 120B, s. 406, s. 409, s. 420
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.MA/10610/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 10610 of 2026
==========================================================
SUNIL ZENDU MALI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DIPESH D SONI(9996) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ROHAN RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 05/05/2026
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
Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in
connection with FIR being C.R. No.I-124/2017 registered with Sayajiganj
Police Station, Vadodara City for the offences under Sections 406, 420,
114 and 120(B) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and subsequently, Section 409 of
IPC and Sections 3 and 7 of the Gujarat Prevention of Interest of Depositors
(In Financial Establishments) Act, 2003 (GPID Act) were added.
[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence and now
nothing is required to be recovered or discovered. He submitted that
initially, the applicant joined as a Senior Trainer along with co-accused in the
year 2011 in Samruddh Jivan Group of Companies, which was thereafter
converted into Samruddh Jivan Multi-State Cooperative Society Limited.
The applicant had joined as Director at the instance of accused no.1,
however, he has resigned in the year 2015. Chargesheet has been filed.
Based on the suspicion, the applicant is arrested. He therefore submits that,
Page 1 of 4
R/CR.MA/10610/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on
regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
[4.0] Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed
the present application and requested to dismiss the present application for
regular bail on the ground that the allegations levelled against the applicant
are serious in nature and considering the gravity of the offence, present
application does not deserve consideration.
[5.0] 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.
[6.0] 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) Accused no.1 Mahesh Motevar and other co-accused have been released
on bail;
(3) Proceedings under the GPID Act are going on and properties of the
society are attached;
(4) None of the offence alleged is punishable with life sentence or death
Page 2 of 4
R/CR.MA/10610/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
penalty and are triable by the Court of JMFC;
(5) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant;
(6) Commencement and conclusion of trial will take time and no useful
purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in custody.
[7.0] 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.
[8.0] 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.I-124/2017
registered with Sayajiganj Police Station, Vadodara City on executing a
personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) with one
surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to
the conditions that he shall;
(a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;
(b) not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution & shall
not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and shall not to play
mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;
(c) surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a week;
(d) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Trial Court
Page 3 of 4
R/CR.MA/10610/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
concerned;
(e) mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in every month
for a period of six months between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;
(f) furnish the present address of his residence to the Investigating Officer
and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not
change the residence without prior permission of Trial Court;
(g) not to indulge in any illegal activity failing which learned trial Court shall
issue warrant and cancel the bail of the applicant.
[9.0] The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in
connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the
above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to
issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.
[10.0] Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to
try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify
and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law.
[11.0] At the trial, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations
of preliminary nature qua the evidence at this stage made by this Court
while enlarging the applicant on bail.
[12.0] Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
permitted
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
R.S. MALEK
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: RIYAZMIYA SABIRMIYA MALEK(HC00180), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 05/05/2026 15:29:17
Page 4 of 4
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.