Created byFuzzy Cloud

High Court of Gujarat

BALWANTARAM ADURAM DARA (BISHNOI)versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

Disposal
38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

Holding

The Court held that bail is appropriate in the present case and granted regular bail to the applicant.

Summary

The applicant, Balwantaram Aduram Dara, filed a regular bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 after a chargesheet was filed for offences under the Prohibition Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The Court examined the nature of the charges, noting that none carried life imprisonment or death penalty, the investigation was complete, and the trial would take time. Relying on established bail principles and Supreme Court precedents (Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor), the Court held that bail is a rule and pre‑trial detention amounts to a de facto conviction. Consequently, the Court granted regular bail on a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with several conditions, directing the applicant to comply with reporting and non‑interference requirements.

Issues considered

  • Whether regular bail can be granted after the filing of a chargesheet for offences under the Prohibition Act and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
  • Whether the nature and gravity of the alleged offences preclude the grant of bail.
  • Whether the applicant's past antecedents affect his eligibility for bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

regular bailchargesheetProhibition ActBharatiya Nyaya SanhitaSection 483 BNSSpre‑trial detentionpersonal libertyArticle 21

Judgment

    R/CR.MA/16581/2026                                 ORDER DATED: 23/07/2026




 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
            AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 16581 of 2026
==========================================================
            BALWANTARAM ADURAM DARA (BISHNOI)
                             Versus
                      STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HARSHAL S. PATEL(14220) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ROHAN RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                             Date : 23/07/2026
                                  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.11209016260251 of 2026 registered with
Himatnagar ‘A’ Division Police Station, District Sabarkantha for the
offences under Sections 65(a), 65(e), 81 and 83 of the Prohibition Act and
sections 336(2), 336(3), 338 and 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
(for short “BNS”).

[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.



                                   Page 1 of 4
      R/CR.MA/16581/2026                                   ORDER DATED: 23/07/2026




[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
respective parties and perused the investigation papers. Following aspects
have been considered:

(1)       The allegation is that the applicant is the owner of the vehicle
          carrying prohibited liquor however, muddamal is already seized and
          even otherwise, 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 30.03.2026;

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

(5)       Though the applicant is having past antecedent, he is presumed
          to be innocent till proven guilty;

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



                                     Page 2 of 4
    R/CR.MA/16581/2026                                    ORDER DATED: 23/07/2026




[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 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.11209016260251 of 2026 registered with Himatnagar ‘A’ Division
Police Station, District Sabarkantha 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.;


                                     Page 3 of 4
    R/CR.MA/16581/2026                                                           ORDER DATED: 23/07/2026




     (f)       furnish the copy of Aadhaar card, email ID/contact number /
               permanent 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/SIM card without prior permission of Trial
               Court;

     (h)       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.)
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 23/07/2026 14:50:37




                                                   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.