NISHANT HITESHBHAI SANGHVIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

    R/CR.MA/13925/2026                                 ORDER DATED: 12/08/2026




 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
   R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
               CHARGESHEET) NO. 13925 of 2026
==========================================================
                 NISHANT HITESHBHAI SANGHVI
                              Versus
                       STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BM MANGUKIYA(437) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS BELA A PRAJAPATI(1946) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                             Date : 12/08/2026
                                  ORDER

[1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.

[2.0] The present application is 9led under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in
connection with FIR being C.R. No.11995001250039 of 2025 registered with
State Monitoring Cell, District Gandhinagar for the oAences under
Sections 8(C), 21(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act.

[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the oAence and now
nothing is required to be recovered or discovered. He has further submitted
that applicant is in the legitimate business of drug and having license also in
that regard, copy of which is tendered and is taken on record. He therefore
submits that, considering the nature of the oAence, the applicant may be
enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.

[4.0] Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has
tendered report submitted by the PSI, State Monitoring Cell, Gandhinagar
which is taken on record. She has opposed the present application and


                                   Page 1 of 5
      R/CR.MA/13925/2026                              ORDER DATED: 12/08/2026




requested to dismiss the present application for regular bail looking to the
nature and gravity of the oAence on the ground that 1798 bottles were
recovered from the residence of the applicant alongwith 158 empty
cartons / boxes and even statements of purchasers / customers of said
contraband have been recorded which clearly reveal that the applicant used
to sell the contraband from his house unauthorizedly and indulged in drug
traIcking activity and therefore, rigors of section 37 of the NDPS Act will
be applicable in the present case since the contraband recovered is in
commercial quantity. She has also submitted that applicant has sold
contraband to co-accused Sanjay and there are UPI transactions between
the applicant and said co-accused Sanjay and therefore, he has requested to
dismiss the present application.

[5.0] While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the
accused in the alleged oAence, 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)       The allegation against the applicant is that applicant used to sell
          contraband drug from his residence however, the applicant has



                                   Page 2 of 5
      R/CR.MA/13925/2026                                   ORDER DATED: 12/08/2026




          produced copy of drug license which shows that the applicant is in
          legitimate business of alleged drug and even otherwise, said
          muddamal contraband is recovered and investigation is over and
          charge-sheet is 9led;

(2)       So far as selling of alleged contraband drug to co-accused Sanjay
          and there being UPI transactions between the applicant and said co-
          accused is concerned, even if we consider breach of any of the
          license condition, applicant is in legitimate business of selling the
          alleged drug and therefore, though rigors of section 37 of the NDPS
          Act are applicable but are satis9ed due to the fact that the applicant
          is holding license to deal in the said drug;

(3)       Applicant is behind the bars since 17.11.2025;

(4)       There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant;

(5)       The applicant is not having any past antecedent ;

(6)       Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will take some
          time.

[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


                                      Page 3 of 5
    R/CR.MA/13925/2026                                    ORDER DATED: 12/08/2026




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 9t
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.11995001250039 of 2025 registered with State Monitoring Cell,
District Gandhinagar on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees
Twenty-9ve 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 territory of State of Gujarat without prior
            permission of the Trial Court concerned;

     (e)    mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in a
            month for a period of six months between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00
            p.m.;

     (f)    furnish the copy of Aadhaar card, email ID/contact number /
            permanent and present address of his residence to the
            Investigating OIcer and also to the Court at the time of
            execution of the bond and shall not change the residence and
            contact number/SIM card 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 oAence 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.



                                     Page 4 of 5
    R/CR.MA/13925/2026                                                           ORDER DATED: 12/08/2026




[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 inOuenced 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.)
Ajay
  Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
  Digitally signed by: AJAY CHANDRAN MENON(HC00939), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 12/08/2026 14:28:21




                                                   Page 5 of 5