AJAYBHAI MANGLUBHAI BHOJAKversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

    R/CR.MA/14000/2026                                 ORDER DATED: 10/07/2026




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
    R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
                 CHARGESHEET) NO. 14000 of 2026
==========================================================
                         AJAYBHAI MANGLUBHAI BHOJAK
                                    Versus
                              STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NIRUPAM D NANAVATY SENIOR ADVOCATE with MR YASH N
NANAVATY(5626) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                               Date : 10/07/2026

                                   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
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in
connection with FIR being C.R. No.11213092250405 OF 2025 registered
with Atkot Police Station, Rajkot Rural for the offences punishable under
Sections 103(1), 140(1), 308(5) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 (for short “BNS”).

[3.0] Learned senior 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 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 looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.

[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


                                   Page 1 of 5
   R/CR.MA/14000/2026                                    ORDER DATED: 10/07/2026




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) None of the offence alleged is punishable with life
              sentence or death penalty and is triable by the Court of
              Magistrate;

              (3) Applicant is behind the bars since 08.02.2026;

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

              (5) Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will take
              some time;

              (7) no antecedent is reported against the present applicant ;

              (8) As per the case of the prosecution, about one year prior to
              the incident, the younger brother of the complainant had
              pledged the EECO car and received Rs.90,000/-. It is alleged
              that, with common intention, the accused persons abducted
              the deceased on a motorcycle and kept him in wrongful
              confinement.    The   wife     of   the   deceased     parted    with
              Rs.20,000/-, and, with a view to extorting more money, it is



                                    Page 2 of 5
   R/CR.MA/14000/2026                                 ORDER DATED: 10/07/2026




              alleged that the accused persons assaulted the deceased, due
              to which he succumbed to the injuries, and thereafter
              destroyed his dead body;

              (9) Prima facie, it appears that the case is based on
              circumstantial evidence. There are no eyewitnesses;

              (10) One more glaring aspect is required to be considered. The
              post-mortem examination has been conducted, and in the
              post-mortem report, in Column No. 17, no bodily injury has
              been noticed, and the cause of death has, till date, not been
              finalized by the prosecution, though the charge-sheet has been
              filed under Section 103(1). On the face of it, even if the
              allegations levelled against the present applicant are accepted
              as the gospel truth, prima facie, an offence under Section
              140(1) is made out.

              (11) The prosecution has relied on two witnesses, namely,
              Shaileshbhai and Vilasbhai. As per the statements recorded by
              the Investigating Officer, the present applicant and the co-
              accused both came on a motorcycle, and at that time the
              deceased was found to be unfit and not in good condition. The
              witnesses were asked to drop the deceased at his home,
              meaning thereby that when the two witnesses last saw the
              deceased with the present applicant, he was alive, and
              thereafter, on the next day, his dead body was found;

              (12) In the absence of any live link or any material to show
              concert, whatever evidence has been collected against the
              present applicant, this Court is of the considered view that,
              without further appreciating the evidence, the present
              application deserves consideration;

[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



                                    Page 3 of 5
    R/CR.MA/14000/2026                                   ORDER DATED: 10/07/2026




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.11213092250405 OF 2025 registered with Atkot Police Station,
Rajkot Rural 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 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 UIDAI Number, Contact Number/s, Passport



                                     Page 4 of 5
      R/CR.MA/14000/2026                                                ORDER DATED: 10/07/2026




                   Number (if he is having the passport), E-mail address and
                   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;

 [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] The reasons assigned herein are tentative in nature and are only for
 the purpose of deciding the present bail application, more particularly
 considering the allegations levelled by the prosecution against the present
 applicant.

 [13.0] Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
 permitted.


                                                                  (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
 KUMAR ALOK


Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ALOK KUMAR(HC01091), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 10/07/2026 14:33:46




                                              Page 5 of 5