ANIKET ARJANBHAI SURELAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
Holding
The Court held that regular bail should be granted as the applicant satisfied the criteria of residence, lack of criminal antecedents, and settlement of the dispute, and there was no prima facie need for continued detention.
Summary
Aniket Arjanbhai Surela applied for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, after a charge‑sheet was filed for offences under Sections 316(2), 316(5), 318(3), 61(2) and 238(2). The applicant, a permanent resident of Rajkot with no prior criminal record, argued that further incarceration would not aid the investigation and that the complainant had signed an affidavit stating the dispute was amicably settled. The State opposed bail, contending that the nature of the offences and the applicant’s role warranted denial of liberty. The Court considered the applicant’s residence, lack of antecedents, the complainant’s settlement affidavit, and the fact that two co‑accused had already been granted bail, and applied the principles laid down in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI. Finding a prima facie case and deeming the applicant fit for bail, the Court ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs.25,000 and several conditions. The order also allowed the trial court to modify or relax conditions as necessary.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted after the filing of a charge‑sheet for offences under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the settlement between the complainant and the accused affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023s. 238(2), s. 316(2), s. 316(5), s. 318(3), s. 483, s. 61(2)
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.MA/23122/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/03/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 23122 of 2025
==========================================================
ANIKET ARJANBHAI SURELA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RATHIN P RAVAL(5013) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR SOAHAM JOSHI, ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)
No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE UTKARSH THAKORBHAI
DESAI
Date : 12/03/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate appearing on behalf of the
applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor
appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.
2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf
of the respondent-State.
3. The applicant has filed this application under
Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
Page 1 of 7
R/CR.MA/23122/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/03/2026
2023 for enlarging the applicant on Regular Bail in
connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11208055250236 of
2025 registered with DCB Police Station, Rajkot City for
the offence punishable under Sections 316(2), 316(5),
318(3), 61(2) and 238(2) of the BNS, 2023.
4. Learned advocate for the applicant would submit
that, considering the role attributed to the applicant, and
nature of the allegation levelled, the applicant may be
enlarged on regular bail. It is further submitted that,
since the charge-sheet is filed, further incarceration of
the applicant will not benefit the Investigation Officer in
any manner. It is further contended that, the applicant is
ready and willing to abide by all the conditions that may
be imposed by this Court, if released on bail. He has
submitted that the complainant has filed an affidavit
stating therein that, he has no objection if the applicant is
released on bail as the dispute has been settled between
the applicant and the complainant.
Page 2 of 7
R/CR.MA/23122/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/03/2026
5. As against the same, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor appearing for the respondent – State has
vehemently objected to the grant of regular bail. Learned
APP has submitted that looking to the nature of offence
and the role attributed to the present applicant as coming
out from the charge-sheet, this Court may not exercise
discretion in favour of the applicant and the application
may be dismissed.
6. I have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf
of the respective parties and perused the papers.
Following aspects are considered:-
i. The applicant is a permanent resident of Rajkot,
hence would be available at the time of trial;
ii. The applicant does not have any criminal
antecedents;
iii. The original complainant Yatinbhai Babubhai
Chudasama has filed an affidavit-in-reply wherein, he
Page 3 of 7
R/CR.MA/23122/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/03/2026
has stated that, the dispute between him and the
present applicant has been amicably settled. He is
present before the court today and has affirmed the
said averments.
iv. Two co-accused have been granted regular bail by
the concerned Sessions Court, and the IO had made
recovery of more amount from one of them, than the
present applicant.
7. This Court has taken into consideration the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay
Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation reported
in [2012] 1 SCC 40.
8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and
considering the nature of the allegations made against
the applicant in the First Information Report, 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.
Page 4 of 7
R/CR.MA/23122/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/03/2026
9. Hence, the present application is allowed. The
applicant is ordered to be released on bail in connection
with F.I.R. registered as C.R. No. 11208055250236 of
2025 registered with DCB Police Station, Rajkot City, on
executing a bail 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;
[c] surrender his passport, if any, to the trial court
within a week, and if he does not possess a passport,
he shall file an affidavit to that effect;
[d] not leave the local limits of Rajkot district without
prior permission of the Trial Court concerned;
Page 5 of 7
R/CR.MA/23122/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/03/2026
[e] furnish the present address of his residence to the
I.O. and to the Court at the time of execution of the
bond and shall not change his residence without prior
intimation to the I.O. and the court;
[f] mark his presence on every Monday before the
concerned police station for six months;
[g] not indulge in similar kind of offence hereinafter,
for which, he shall file affidavits before the concerned
court and the police station.
10. 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 Court concerned will be at
liberty to take appropriate action in accordance with law.
11. Bail bond to be executed before the trial court
having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the
concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the
Page 6 of 7
R/CR.MA/23122/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/03/2026
above conditions in accordance with law.
12. At the stage of trial, the competent court shall not be
influenced by any observations of this Court which are of
preliminary nature, made at this stage only for the
purpose of enlarging the applicant on regular bail.
13. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct
service is permitted.
(UTKARSH THAKORBHAI DESAI, J)
DIVYA
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: DIVYA NAIR(HC00199), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 12/03/2026 18:33:00
Page 7 of 7
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.