AMIT MAHINDARSINGH SONIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

   R/CR.MA/15314/2026                                  ORDER DATED: 07/07/2026




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
        R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
                    CHARGESHEET) NO. 15314 of 2026
==========================================================
                       AMIT MAHINDRASINGH SONI
                                    Versus
                             STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DAX K SOLANKI(12696) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
   CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                               Date : 07/07/2026
                                   ORDER


      Mr. S.D. Moghariya, learned advocate has produced a reply
and submitted that he has instructions to appear on behalf of
the complainant.

      He is permitted to file his apeparance. The reply is taken
on reocrd.

[1.0] RULE. Learned advocates waive service of rule for the
respecrtive respondents.

[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.11210062260036 of 2026 registered with Cyber Crime
Police Station, Surat City, for the offence under Sections 420,
465, 467, 468, 471, of the IPC and Section 66(D) of the IT Act.

[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant
submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely
implicated in the offence. 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


                                  Page 1 of 5
   R/CR.MA/15314/2026                          ORDER DATED: 07/07/2026




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 very much involved in the present offence and
considering the gravity of offence, no case is made out to
entertain present bail application. Therefore, present application
does not deserve consideration.

[4.1] Learned advocate appearing for the complainant has no
objection if the application is allowed.

[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.




                              Page 2 of 5
      R/CR.MA/15314/2026                                ORDER DATED: 07/07/2026




[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)     Substantial part of investigation is over;
         (2)     Applicant is behind the bar since 25.05.2026;
         (3)     There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from
         the applicant;
         (4)     The applicant has no past antecedent and none of the
         offence alleged is punishable with life sentence or death
         penalty;
         (5)     The allegation against the applicant is that, at the
         instance of the co-accused, he was working as an agent
         and procured Canadian work permit visas for clients. It is
         alleged that he induced the complainant by promising to
         secure a Canadian work permit visa. It is further alleged
         that an amount of Rs. 7,01,999/- was transferred to the
         bank account of the present applicant. However, the
         complaint was lodged after an unexplained delay of three
         years.
         (6)     Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will
         take its own 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


                                   Page 3 of 5
   R/CR.MA/15314/2026                                  ORDER DATED: 07/07/2026




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       C.R.
No.11210062260036 of 2026 registered with Cyber Crime
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 Court concerned;
  (e)      mark presence before the concerned Police Station once
           in every month for a period of six months between 11.00


                                   Page 4 of 5
           R/CR.MA/15314/2026                                                ORDER DATED: 07/07/2026




                  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
     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)
     ALI



Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ISTAYAK ALI(HC01093), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 08/07/2026 11:44:45

                                                   Page 5 of 5