High Court of Gujarat
SURESHBHAI HIRABHAI KATARAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- HASMUKH D SUTHAR
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to regular bail and granted it subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Sureshbhai Hirabhai Katara, applied for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with an FIR alleging forgery of a death certificate and related offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The State opposed bail, claiming the petitioner played an active role in a serious offence. The court examined factors such as the nature of the accusation, the documentary nature of evidence, the applicant’s clean record, and the fact that co‑accused had already been released on bail. Relying on Supreme Court precedents emphasizing bail as a rule and personal liberty under Article 21, the court found the case suitable for bail. Consequently, the court granted regular bail on a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with a surety and imposed several conditions, including surrender of passport and regular reporting to police.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 BNSS before the filing of a chargesheet despite the alleged forgery offences.
- Whether the nature and seriousness of the alleged offences justify denial of bail.
- Whether parity with co‑accused already released on bail mandates granting bail to the applicant.
- How Supreme Court jurisprudence on bail and pre‑trial liberty applies to the present case.
Legislation cited
Subjects
regular bailpre‑trial detentionforgery of documentsbail jurisprudencepersonal libertySection 483 BNSSBharatiya Nyaya Sanhitaconditions of bail
Judgment
R/CR.MA/16424/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
CHARGESHEET) NO. 16424 of 2026
==============================================
SURESHBHAI HIRABHAI KATARA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==============================================
Appearance:
MR HR PRAJAPATI(674) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR YUVRAJ BRAHMBHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 17/07/2026
ORDER
1) RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.
2) 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.11188007260364 of 2026
registered with Meghraj Police Station, District - Aravalli, for
the offence under Sections 336(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 61 of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3) Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence.
Substantial part of investigation is over. He therefore submits that,
considering the nature of the offence, the applicants may be
enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
4) Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has
opposed the present application and submitted that, the applicant
is involved in serious offence and has played active role in the
Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/16424/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2026
commission of the present offence. Considering the conduct of the
applicant, application does not deserve any consideration.
5) 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) 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 the applicant
in connivance with the co-accused had prepared forged
Death Certificate and on the basis of the same got
entered their names as legal heirs of the deceased in the
revenue record and the applicant was served with notice
under Section 135-D of the Bombay Land Revenue Code.
The role attributed to the applicant is that he had forged
Death Certificate. Co-accused are already released on
bail.;
(2) Substantial part of investigation is over;
(3) Applicant is behind the bar since 31.05.2026;
(4) The applicant has no past antecedents;
Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/16424/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2026
(5) The case is based on documentary evidence and there is
nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant;
(6) Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will take
some time.
(7) Co-accused having similarly situated role are enlarged on
regular bail and therefore, on the ground of parity also
(Rameshbhai Batubhai Dhabi Vs. State of Gujarat
reported in 2011 (3) GLR 1999), present application
deserves consideration.
7) 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) 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.11188007260364 of 2026
registered with Meghraj Police Station, District - Aravalli 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
Page 3 of 5
R/CR.MA/16424/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2026
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 to leave State of Gujarat without prior permission of
the Trial Court concerned;
(e) mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in
a week till filing of the chargesheet and after filing of the
chargesheet, mark presence before the concerned police
station once in a month for a period of six months;
(f) furnish the Aadhar 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) if the applicant is found to be indulged in any illegal
activities in future, the trial Court concerned will be free to
issue warrant and cancel the bail granted to the applicant.
9) 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) 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.
Page 4 of 5
R/CR.MA/16424/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2026
11) 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) Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
ANKIT JANSARI
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE ONE, at High Court of Gujarat on 17/07/2026 15:48:41
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