High Court of Gujarat
PRADIPKUMAR @TAKO BHARATBHAI INAMDARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- HASMUKH D SUTHAR
Holding
The Court held that the applicant is entitled to regular bail as the case satisfies the criteria for bail despite the charge‑sheet.
Summary
The applicant, Pradipkumar @Tako Bharatbhai Inamdar, was charged under several provisions of the Prohibition Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 after a charge‑sheet was filed. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The Court examined the nature of the accusations, the fact that none of the offences carried life or death penalty, the applicant's custody since May 2026, the lack of any material to be recovered, and the fact that co‑accused had been granted bail, invoking parity. Relying on precedents such as Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor, the Court held that pre‑trial detention would amount to a de facto conviction and that bail is a rule, not an exception. 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, monthly police reporting, and restrictions on movement.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted after the filing of a charge‑sheet under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for the offences alleged.
- Whether the nature and gravity of the offences under the Prohibition Act and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita preclude the grant of bail.
- Whether parity with co‑accused who were granted bail warrants the applicant's bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023s. 483
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023s. 111(2)(b), s. 111(3), s. 111(4), s. 336(2), s. 336(3), s. 340(2)
Subjects
regular bailcharge‑sheetBharatiya Nagarik Suraksha SanhitaProhibition ActBharatiya Nyaya Sanhitapre‑trial detentionArticle 21parityco‑accused
Judgment
R/CR.MA/17572/2026 ORDER DATED: 30/07/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 17572 of 2026
==========================================================
PRADIPKUMAR @TAKO BHARATBHAI INAMDAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KEVAL BRAHMBHATT for MR BRIJESH K RAMANUJ(9898) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ADITYA JADEJA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 30/07/2026
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.11204060260166 of 2026 registered with
Thasra Police Station, District Kheda for the offences under Sections 65-A,
65(e), 116-B, 98(2), 81 and 83 of the Prohibition Act and sections 111(2)(b),
111(3), 111(4), 336(2), 336(3) 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/17572/2026 ORDER DATED: 30/07/2026
[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 proposed receiver
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;
(3) Applicant is behind the bars since 21.05.2026;
(4) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant;
(5) Though the applicant is having one 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/17572/2026 ORDER DATED: 30/07/2026
(7) Co-accused similarly situated 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.
[7.0] 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.11204060260166 of 2026 registered with Thasra Police Station,
District Kheda 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 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;
Page 3 of 4
R/CR.MA/17572/2026 ORDER DATED: 30/07/2026
(d) not leave the territory of State of Gujarat 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 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;
(g) not to indulge in any illegal activity failing which learned trial
Court shall issue warrant and cancel the bail of the applicant.
(h) not to enter District Kheda for a period of SIX MONTHS
except for marking presence before the concerned police
station and/or for attending the court proceedings.
[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 30/07/2026 14:32:59
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