Created byFuzzy Cloud

High Court of Gujarat

OMPRAKASH KHERAJRAM NAVALRAM JATversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

Disposal
38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

Holding

The Court held that regular bail must be granted to the applicant as the circumstances do not warrant continued pre‑trial detention.

Summary

The applicant, OmpraKash Kherajram Navalram Jat, was arrested on 10 May 2026 for allegedly transporting 28,368 bottles of IMFL liquor worth Rs.74,07,888 under the Gujarat Prohibition Act. He filed a regular bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, claiming innocence and that the investigation was nearly complete with no further recovery required. The State opposed bail, arguing the applicant's involvement in the offence. The Court examined bail jurisprudence, noting the principles from Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor, and considered factors such as the nature of the offence, risk of tampering, and the applicant's clean record. Finding that continued detention amounted to a pre‑trial conviction and that the applicant posed no risk, the Court granted regular bail on a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with several conditions.

Issues considered

  • Whether regular bail under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 can be granted before the filing of a chargesheet in a case under the Gujarat Prohibition Act.
  • Whether the applicant's continued detention is justified in view of the investigation status, risk of witness tampering, and the applicant's personal circumstances.

Legislation cited

Subjects

regular bailpre‑trial detentionSection 483 BNSSGujarat Prohibition Actpersonal libertyArticle 21bail jurisprudence

Judgment

      R/CR.MA/13424/2026                                    ORDER DATED: 17/06/2026




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
            CHARGESHEET) NO. 13424 of 2026

==============================================
              OMPRAKASH KHERAJRAM NAVALRAM JAT
                                Versus
                          STATE OF GUJARAT
==============================================
Appearance:
KAMALKUMAR R SHARMA(9502) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
O I PATHAN(7684) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==============================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                               Date : 17/06/2026

                                      ORDER

(1)      RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.

(2)      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.11213068260244 of 2026
         registered with Vinchhiya Police Station, District - Rajkot
         Rural, for the offence under the provisions of Gujarat Prohibition
         Act.

(3)      Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that
         applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence.
         Substantial part of investigation is over. Nothing is to be recovered
         or     discovered   from   the   applicant.   He   is   in   custody    since
         10.05.2026. He therefore submits that, considering the nature of
         the offence, the applicants may be enlarged on regular bail by
         imposing suitable conditions.

(4)      Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has
         opposed the present application and submitted that, the applicant
         was driving the vehicle from which IMFL liquor total 28,368 bottles
         wroth Rs.74,07,888/- were found. Considering the conduct of the


                                      Page 1 of 4
      R/CR.MA/13424/2026                                         ORDER DATED: 17/06/2026




         applicant, application does not deserve any consideration.

(5)      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)      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 almost over;
             (2)     Applicant is behind the bar since 10.05.2026;
             (3)     There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the
                     applicant;
             (4)     There is no possibility to conclude the trial in near future;
             (5)     Offence is triable by JMFC Court;
             (6)     The applicant has no past antecedents;
             (7)     The prosecution failed to point out as to under what
                     circumstances the detention of the applicant is required to
                     be extended.


(7)      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


                                         Page 2 of 4
      R/CR.MA/13424/2026                                  ORDER DATED: 17/06/2026




         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)      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.11213068260244 of 2026
         registered with Vinchhiya Police Station, District - Rajkot
         Rural on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees
         Twenty-five Thousand only) with one local 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 to leave State of Gujarat without prior permission of
                     the Trial Court concerned;
             (e)     mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in
                     a week till filing of the chargesheet and after filing of the


                                       Page 3 of 4
      R/CR.MA/13424/2026                                                               ORDER DATED: 17/06/2026




                          chargesheet, mark presence before the concerned police
                          station once in a month for a period of six months;
                (f)       furnish the Aadhar 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 and SIM Card without prior
                          permission of Trial Court;
                (g)       if the applicant is found to be indulged in any illegal
                          activities in future, the trial Court concerned will be free to
                          issue warrant and cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

(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 Judge
           concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate 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 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)       Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
           permitted.




                                                                              (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
ANKIT JANSARI
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE I, at High Court of Gujarat on 17/06/2026 14:55:21




                                                       Page 4 of 4


Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "regular bail"Sign in to search

For a digitally signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's own website. Only the court can issue one.