High Court of Gujarat
NILESHBHAI VIKRAMBHAI THORIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- HASMUKH D SUTHAR
Holding
The court held that, on the facts, the applicant is entitled to regular bail despite the nature of the NDPS allegations.
Summary
The applicant, Nileshbhai Vikrambhai Thori, filed a regular bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with an FIR alleging offences under Sections 8(c), 20(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act. The prosecution opposed bail, alleging the applicant’s active participation in the crime, while the defence argued his innocence and lack of prior record. The court examined standard bail factors, noted that the seized narcotics were found in a vehicle not owned by the applicant, and observed that a substantial part of the investigation was complete with no material to be recovered from him. Relying on Supreme Court precedents (Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor) and the principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception, the court held that the applicant was entitled to bail. Accordingly, the bail was granted on a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with a surety and a series of conditions, pending trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for offences punishable under the NDPS Act.
- Whether the applicant’s alleged involvement and the seriousness of the NDPS offences justify denial of bail.
- Whether the status of the investigation, lack of antecedents, and the fact that the seized narcotics were not linked to the applicant warrant the exercise of discretion in favour of bail.
- How the principles laid down in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor apply to this bail application.
Legislation cited
Subjects
regular bailNDPS ActSection 483 BNSSpre‑trial detentionbail jurisprudenceArticle 21personal libertycourt conditions
Judgment
R/CR.MA/19589/2026(GJHC240635502026) ORDER DATED: 21/08/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
CHARGESHEET) NO. 19589 of 2026
==============================================
NILESHBHAI VIKRAMBHAI THORI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==============================================
Appearance:
MR IMTIYAJ M KURESHI(5301) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS MAITHILI MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 21/08/2026
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.11209003260381 of 2026
registered with Kheroj Police Station, District - Sabarkantha,
for the offence under Sections 8(c), 20(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act.
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 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 submitted that, the applicant
is involved in serious offence and has played active role in the
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
Page 1 of 4
R/CR.MA/19589/2026(GJHC240635502026) ORDER DATED: 21/08/2026
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) That from bonnet of one Hyundai Verna car Ganja
weighing 1.35 kgs was found. The applicant is neither the
owner of the said car nor connected with the said car. The
accused nos.1 to 2, were arrested on the spot, whereas,
the applicant fled away from the spot and abetted the
offence. As the muddamal being intermediate quantity,
the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not be
applicable.;
(2) Applicant is behind the bar since 27.07.2026;
(3) The applicant has no past antecedents.;
(4) Substantial part of investigation is over;
(5) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the
applicant;
(6) Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will take
some time.
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
Page 2 of 4
R/CR.MA/19589/2026(GJHC240635502026) ORDER DATED: 21/08/2026
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.11209003260381 of 2026
registered with Kheroj Police Station, District - Sabarkantha 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 a week till filing of the chargesheet and after filing
Page 3 of 4
R/CR.MA/19589/2026(GJHC240635502026) ORDER DATED: 21/08/2026
of the chargesheet, mark presence before the concerned
police station once in a month for a period of six months;
(f) shall furnish the copy of Aadhar card, email ID /
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 his residence,
contact number / SIM Card 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.
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 21/08/2026 14:53:08
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