HAREKRUSHNA @ HARI KAMLESHBHAI RAVALversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

    R/CR.MA/12571/2026                               ORDER DATED: 15/07/2026




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

    R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
                CHARGESHEET) NO. 12571 of 2026
==========================================================
                     HAREKRISHNA KAMLESHBHAI RAVAL
                                 Versus
                           SATATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ZUBIN F BHARDA, WITH MR DIPESH D SONI(9996) for the Applicant(s)
No. 1
MR VINAY VISHEN, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                              Date : 15/07/2026

                                      ORDER

[1.0] Leave to amend the name of the applicant. RULE. Learned APP
waives service of rule for the respondent-State.

[2.0] The present application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in
connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11210015250143 of 2025 registered
with DCB Police Station, Surat City, for the offences under Sections
316(5), 319(2), 61 and 3(5) of BNS.

[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that
the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence.
Investigation is over and chargesheet has been filed. Nothing is further
required to be recovered or discovered. The applicant has no past
antecedent. Co-accused are granted bail by the Sessions Court and on the
ground of parity also, applicant may be enlarged on bail. Allegation made in
the FIR that the accused through virtual platform “RapNet” crated fake
profiles of US Diamond Company and by winning trust of the complainant,
fraudulently procured diamond from the complainant and sold them to
Dubai and Bangkok and thereby, total 7 diamonds worth of Rs.4,80,79,800/-
were delivered to the co-accused and out of 7, 6 diamonds have already
recovered from the co-accused. Allegation against the applicant is that,


                                      Page 1 of 5
    R/CR.MA/12571/2026                                 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2026




after selling 7th diamond, the applicant has received Rs.20 lacs and out of
the same, the applicant is ready and willing to pay 50% amount i.e. Rs.10
lacs within a period of two months. He therefore submits that, 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 applicant is a kingpin of the said offence.
Co-accused are released on bail is not a ground to enlarge the applicant on
bail because the applicant along with co-accused by using RapNet online
platform purchased valuable diamonds from the complainant and then did
not make any payment and delivered to Dubai and Bangkok. Diamond is yet
to be recovered and direct money trial leads to the applicant is found.
Therefore, 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:


                                   Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/12571/2026                                     ORDER DATED: 15/07/2026




   (1)     Investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed;
   (2)     Applicant is behind the bar since 25.03.2026;
   (3)     There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the
           applicant;
   (4)     Offence is triable by JMFC Court ;
   (5)     No past antecedent ;
   (6)     Co-accused having similarly situated role are enlarged on
           regular bail and therefore, on the ground of parity also
           (Rameshbhai Batubhai Dhabi Vs. State of Gujarat reported in
           2011      (3)   GLR   1999),    present   application    deserves
           consideration.
   (7)     Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will take
           its own time.
   (8)     Allegation against the accused is that, the applicant along with
           co-accused through virtual platform “RapNet” crated fake
           profiles of US Diamond Company and by winning trust of the
           complainant, fraudulently procured diamonds from the
           complainant and sent them to Dubai and Bangkok and thereby,
           total 7 diamonds worth of Rs.4,80,79,800/- were delivered to
           the co-accused and then did not make payment and committed
           fraud. Out of 7 diamonds, 6 have already recovered from the
           co-accused. Impugned FIR has been lodged qua total 7
           diamonds and out of them, 6 diamonds have already been
           recovered.

           So far allegation against the applicant is concerned, after
           selling 7th diamond, the applicant has only received Rs.20 lacs
           by selling the same, for which, he is ready to deposit Rs.10 lacs.

           Undertaking filed by brother of the applicant - Uday K. Raval
           stating that the applicant will deposit a sum of Rs.10 lacs
           within a period of two months before learned trial Court from


                                  Page 3 of 5
    R/CR.MA/12571/2026                                  ORDER DATED: 15/07/2026




               the date of his actual release from judicial custody. The
               undertaking dated 15.07.2026 is ordered to be taken on
               record.

[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.
11210015250143 of 2025 registered with DCB Police Station, Surat 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/she 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


                                    Page 4 of 5
        R/CR.MA/12571/2026                                                        ORDER DATED: 15/07/2026




                 Court 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 Aadhaar card, email ID/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/
                 contact number 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.
       (h)       the applicant shall file an undertaking at the time of releasing
                 from jail before the learned trial Court as stated in Para 6(8) of
                 this order and shall deposit Rs.10,00,000/- (rupees Ten Lakhs)
                 within a period of two months before learned trial Court from
                 the date of his actual release from judicial custody.

  [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)
  SUCHIT


Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: PATEL SUCHIT JAYESHBHAI(HC01083), Private Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 15/07/2026 18:28:04
                                                     Page 5 of 5