High Court of Gujarat
MEHBUBSHA URFE MEBLO JAKIRSHA SHAHAMDARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- HASMUKH D SUTHAR
Holding
The Court held that, given the completed investigation, lack of necessity for further detention, and the principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception, the applicant is entitled to regular bail.
Summary
The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for offences including theft, trespass and related provisions, after a charge‑sheet had been filed. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences, the applicant's past antecedents and a risk of absconding. The Court examined the statutory factors for bail, noted that the investigation was complete, no further recovery was required, and that the prosecution had not demonstrated a need to keep the accused detained. Relying on Supreme Court precedents (Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor), the Court emphasized that bail is the rule and jail the exception, and that personal liberty under Article 21 must be protected. Consequently, the Court granted regular bail on a personal bond with several conditions, directing the trial court to enforce them.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted under Section 483 BNSS after a charge‑sheet for offences under Sections 305(a), 331(3), 331(4), 317(4), 317(5) and 54 of the BNSS.
- Whether the nature of the offences and the applicant's past antecedents preclude the grant of bail.
- Whether the prosecution has shown a necessity to continue the applicant's pre‑trial detention.
- How the principles laid down in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor apply to the present bail application.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023s. 305(a), s. 317(4), s. 317(5), s. 331(3), s. 331(4), s. 483, s. 54
Subjects
regular bailSection 483 BNSSpre‑trial detentionpersonal libertyArticle 21Gujaratcriminal procedurethefttrespass
Judgment
R/CR.MA/14555/2026 ORDER DATED: 30/06/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 14555 of 2026
==========================================================
MEHBUBSHA URFE MEBLO JAKIRSHA SHAHAMDAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. VIPUL SAVDAS REVDARIYA(14299) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ADITYA JADEJA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 30/06/2026
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.11203025260100 of 2026 registered with Junagadh
Taluka Police Station, District Junagadh, for the offences
under Sections 305(a), 331(3), 331(4), 317(4), 317(5) and 54 of
BNS, 2023.
[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant
submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely
implicated in the offence. Allegation against the present applicant
is that the applicant along with co-accused trespassed the house of
the complainant and stolen the gold ornaments. Even otherwise,
investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. Nothing is
required to be recovered or discovered. He, therefore submits
Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/14555/2026 ORDER DATED: 30/06/2026
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 and
learned advocate for the original complainant opposed the present
application and requested to dismiss the present application for
regular bail on the ground that the applicant is very much involved
in the serious offence and considering the gravity of offence, no
case is made out to entertain present bail application. The
applicant is having similar nature of two past antecedents also. If
the applicant is released on bail, possibility cannot be ruled out
that the applicant will flee from justice. 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
Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/14555/2026 ORDER DATED: 30/06/2026
respective parties and perused the investigation papers. Following
aspects have been considered:
(1) Investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed;
(2) Applicant is behind the bar since 06/03/2026;
(3) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the
applicant;
(4) Triable by the JMFC;
(5) Though the applicant is having past antecedents, he is
presumed to be innocent till proven guilty;.
(6) Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will
take its own time;
(7) Prosecution has failed to point out the circumstances to
continue or prolong his incarceration;
[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
Page 3 of 5
R/CR.MA/14555/2026 ORDER DATED: 30/06/2026
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.11203025260100 of 2026 registered with Junagadh
Taluka Police Station, District Junagadh, 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/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 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.
[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
Page 4 of 5
R/CR.MA/14555/2026 ORDER DATED: 30/06/2026
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)
ILA
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ILA PRAFULKUMAR PATEL(HC00194), Principal Pvt Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 30/06/2026 15:54:41
Page 5 of 5
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