ROHITBHAI SONABHAI MARVADI @ SHAM SONABHAI MARVADIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.MA/10989/2026                                   ORDER DATED: 07/05/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

     R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
                 CHARGESHEET) NO. 10989 of 2026

==========================================================
     ROHITBHAI SONABHAI MARVADI @ SHAM SONABHAI MARVADI
                            Versus
                      STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. AKASH R SALAT(18703) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. RAJESHKUMAR S MISHRA(9946) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR TRUPESH KATHIRIYA, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL

                                Date : 07/05/2026

                                 ORAL ORDER


        Draft amendment, which is already on record, is

granted. To be carried out forthwith.


1.      Heard learned advocate Mr.Akash Salat appearing on

behalf      of    the     applicant    and      learned   Additional        Public

Prosecutor Mr.Trupesh Kathiriya appearing on behalf of the

respondent-State.

1.1. Learned advocate Mr.Turab Govani submits that he has

instructions to appear on behalf of respondent no.2 and that

he may be permitted to file his Vakalatnama. Affidavit-in-reply

filed by learned advocate Mr.Govani on behalf of the

complainant is taken on record.



                                      Page 1 of 6
     R/CR.MA/10989/2026                                  ORDER DATED: 07/05/2026




2.      Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of

the respondent-State and learned advocate Mr.Govani waives

service of rule on behalf of respondent no.2.


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.   11192061260183/2026            registered         with

Viramgam Town Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offence

punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(i)(m) of the BNS

and Sections 4(1), 5(l), 6, 8, 12 of POCSO Act.


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 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


                                    Page 2 of 6
     R/CR.MA/10989/2026                                          ORDER DATED: 07/05/2026




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, 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. While the age of the prosecutrix is stated to be around

     17 years 01 months, the age of the present applicant being

     20 years could not be ignored.

     ii. Prima facie, it appears that the applicant and the

     prosecutrix were having a love relationship.

     iii. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of State of Uttar

     Pradesh vs. Anurudh & Anr. reported in 2026 INSC 47

     having noted the fact of the POCSO Act being misused even

     when      the        case   is   one   of        a   romantic      /   consensual

     relationship          between     adolescents          or     one      where      the

     prosecutrix / victim is adolescent and where the age gap

     between the parties is not substantial.

     iv. The fact of the present applicant being in custody since



                                        Page 3 of 6
     R/CR.MA/10989/2026                             ORDER DATED: 07/05/2026




     17.03.2026.

     v. As per the statement made by learned advocates for the

     complainant and the prosecutrix, parties have settled the

     issue inter-se and whereas, learned advocate Mr.Govani on

     behalf of the complainant has tendered affidavit whereby

     the complainant has stated as much. Considering the same,

     this Court is inclined to allow this application.


        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. 11192061260183/2026 registered with

Viramgam Town Police Station, Ahmedabad, on executing a


                                    Page 4 of 6
     R/CR.MA/10989/2026                         ORDER DATED: 07/05/2026




bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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;

     [c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a

     week;

     [d] not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission

     of the Sessions Court concerned;

     [e] furnish the present address of residence to the I.O. and

     also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and

     shall not change the residence without prior intimation to

     the I.O.;

     [f] mark presence once a month for a period of three

     months before the concerned police station.


9.      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 Court concerned will be free to take appropriate



                               Page 5 of 6
        R/CR.MA/10989/2026                                                        ORDER DATED: 07/05/2026




  action in the matter.


  10.       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.       At the stage of trial, the trial court shall not be

  influenced by any observations of this Court which are of

  preliminary nature made at this stage, only for the purpose of

  considering the application of the applicant for being released

  on regular bail.


  12.       The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is

  made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is

  permitted.


                                                                                   (NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
  Bhoomi


Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: BHOOMI YOGESHBHAI MISTRY(HC01557), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 08/05/2026 12:42:45




                                                     Page 6 of 6