Created byFuzzy Cloud

High Court of Gujarat

MAHESHKUMAR AMRUTLAL PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

Disposal
38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

Holding

The court held that bail may be granted after a chargesheet if the accused is not a flight risk, has no prior antecedents, and the investigation is complete, subject to strict conditions.

Summary

Maheshkumar Amrutlal Patel, a public servant, was arrested on 21 April 2026 in connection with a corruption case alleging he demanded Rs.6,05,000 as illegal gratification for approvals. A chargesheet under Sections 7, 12, 13(1) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018 was filed, and the applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The State opposed bail, arguing the applicant played an active role and might tamper with evidence or flee. The Court examined factors such as the nature of the offence, the applicant’s clean record, completion of investigation, lack of flight risk, and the principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception, citing Supreme Court precedents. Finding no substantial risk of tampering or absconding, the Court granted regular bail with a personal bond and several conditions. The order emphasized that the trial court must not be influenced by the bail order’s preliminary observations.

Issues considered

  • Whether regular bail can be granted after the filing of a chargesheet under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
  • Whether the applicant poses a risk of tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, or absconding that would justify denial of bail.
  • How the principles laid down in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor apply to bail decisions in corruption cases.

Legislation cited

Subjects

regular bailchargesheetcorruptionprevention of corruption actBNSS 2023public servantflight riskpersonal libertyArticle 21

Judgment

      R/CR.MA/17197/2026                                 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

     R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
                CHARGESHEET) NO. 17197 of 2026

==============================================
                  MAHESHKUMAR AMRUTLAL PATEL
                                Versus
                          STATE OF GUJARAT
==============================================
Appearance:
MR. ARSH R SHAIKH(6726) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. SAMIYA M. BELEWALA(18723) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HK PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==============================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                              Date : 27/07/2026

                                     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.03 of 2026 registered with
         Bhavnagar ACB Police Station, Bhavnagar for the offences
         under Sections 7, 12, 13(1) and 13(2) of the Prevention of
         Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3)       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.
         Investigation is over and chargesheet has been filed. He therefore
         submits that, considering the nature of the offence, the applicant
         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 requested to dismiss the
         present application for regular bail on the ground that the applicant
         is involved in the present offence and played an active role. There
         is every possibility that, if the applicant is released on bail, he will


                                     Page 1 of 5
     R/CR.MA/17197/2026                                         ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026




        indulge in similar offences and try to tamper with the evidence.
        Therefore, present application does not deserve 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 applicant is a public servant. It is alleged that the
                          applicant through the co-accused demanded illegal
                          gratification of Rs.6,05,000/- to facilitate the applicant
                          for approvals and clearances, application for FSCA. Out
                          of the said demand the accused no.2 Prakash acepted
                          Rs.2 lakhs on behest of the applicant. The amount of
                          illegal gratification was recovered except the Voice
                          Spectrography Test which is yet to be conducted. Upon
                          instruction the learned Advocate for the applicant has
                          submitted that the applicant is ready and willing to join
                          further investigation also. In view of above as charge-
                          sheet is filed and there is no flight risk of the applicant
                          and there is no possibility of the applicant tampering



                                        Page 2 of 5
     R/CR.MA/17197/2026                                     ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026




                          with the evidence.;
                (2)       Applicant is behind the bars since 21.04.2026;
                (3)       The applicant has no past antecedents;
                (4)       Investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed;
                (5)       There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from
                          the applicant;
                (6)       Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will
                          take some time.
                (7)       Learned Advocate for the applicant upon instructions
                          has submitted that applicant is ready and willing to
                          appear for Voice Spectrography Test as and when
                          Investigating Agency will call him, and has also
                          submitted a copy of undertaking to that effect, which
                          is taken on record.;


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



                                           Page 3 of 5
     R/CR.MA/17197/2026                                  ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026




        connection with FIR being C.R. No.03 of 2026 registered with
        Bhavnagar ACB Police Station, Bhavnagar 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;
            (a)    shall not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;
            (b)     shall 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)     shall surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a
                    week;
            (d)     shall not leave the territory of the State of Gujarat without
                    prior permission of the Trial Court concerned;
            (e)     shall 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)     shall furnish the 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
                    without prior permission of Trial Court;
            (g)     shall not indulge in any illegal activity, failing which the
                    learned trial Court shall issue warrant and cancel the bail
                    of the applicant.
            (h)     shall comply with the undertaking filed today before
                    this Court failing which learned trial Court shall have
                    liberty to issue warrant against 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.



                                        Page 4 of 5
      R/CR.MA/17197/2026                                                                ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026




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.


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 27/07/2026 14:43:30




                                                        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

For a digitally signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's own website. Only the court can issue one.