Created byFuzzy Cloud

High Court of Gujarat

AAZAM S/O RAMZAN USMAN MANSURIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

Disposal
38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

Holding

The Court held that, on the facts, the applicant is entitled to regular bail and ordered its grant.

Summary

The applicant, Aazam, filed a regular bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with an FIR alleging violations of Sections 25(1‑b)(a) and 29 of the Arms Act and Section 135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The Court examined factors such as the nature of the accusation, lack of material to be recovered from the applicant, his custody since 28‑03‑2026, and his past antecedents, while emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception. Relying on Supreme Court precedents (Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor) and Article 21 of the Constitution, the Court held that the applicant was entitled to regular bail. Accordingly, bail was granted on a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with a local surety and a set of conditions, and the applicant was ordered to be released.

Issues considered

  • Whether regular bail can be granted under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for offences under the Arms Act and Gujarat Police Act.
  • Whether the nature of the alleged offence, risk of witness tampering, and the applicant's antecedents preclude bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

regular bailBNSS 2023Arms ActGujarat Police Actpresumption of innocencepersonal libertyArticle 21

Judgment

    R/CR.MA/16074/2026                                 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2026




 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
   R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
               CHARGESHEET) NO. 16074 of 2026
==========================================================
              AAZAM S/O RAMZAN USMAN MANSURI
                               Versus
                       STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MOHDDANISH M BAREJIA(10612) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR KRUTIK PARIKH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                             Date : 16/07/2026
                                  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.11191011230224 of 2023 registered with
DCB Police Station, Ahmedabad City for the offences under Sections 25(1-
b)(a) and 29 of the Arms Act and section 135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act.

[3.0] Learned 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


                                   Page 1 of 4
      R/CR.MA/16074/2026                                     ORDER DATED: 16/07/2026




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 is that the applicant has supplied fire arm to the co-
          accused and on the basis of statement of said co-accused, applicant
          is arraigned as an accused however, nothing is found from the
          conscious possession of the present applicant and even otherwise,
          investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed;

(2)       Applicant is behind the bars since 28.03.2026;

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

(4)       The applicant is having nine past antecedents out of which eight are
          registered at Madhya Pradesh and one at Gujarat however, the
          applicant is governed by presumption of innocence unless proven
          guilty;

(5)       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


                                     Page 2 of 4
    R/CR.MA/16074/2026                                    ORDER DATED: 16/07/2026




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 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.11191011230224 of 2023 registered with DCB Police Station,
Ahmedabad City 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 leave the country 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 Number


                                     Page 3 of 4
    R/CR.MA/16074/2026                                                           ORDER DATED: 16/07/2026




               (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 and contact number so provided without prior
               permission of Trial Court;

     (h)       not to indulge in any illegal activity or any similar type of offence
               failing which concerned Investigating Officer shall have liberty to
               file an application for cancellation of bail against the present
               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.)
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 16/07/2026 14:15:02




                                                   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.