High Court of Gujarat
MAHAVIRSINH KANUBHA GOHILversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Decided
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- NIKHIL S KARIEL
Holding
The Court held that, on the facts, the applicant is entitled to regular bail despite the charge‑sheet and alleged antecedents.
Summary
Mahaveersinh Kanubha Gohil applied for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 after a charge‑sheet was filed for alleged forgery and illegal takeover of property. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the applicant’s alleged involvement in an organized crime syndicate. The Court examined the applicant’s limited role—signing an electricity connection application—and noted he was not part of the principal conspiracy, despite having prior antecedents. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, the Court held that bail could be granted in the interest of justice. Consequently, the bail application was allowed subject to a Rs.50,000 bond, a surety, and several conditions including residence reporting and travel restrictions.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted after the filing of a charge‑sheet under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the applicant’s alleged role in forgery and property takeover justifies denial of bail.
- Whether the applicant’s prior antecedents and alleged association with an organized crime syndicate preclude bail.
- How the principles laid down in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation apply to the discretion of granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 308(4), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 3(5), 483, 61
Subjects
- regular bail
- charge sheet
- forgery
- property dispute
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Section 483
- organized crime
- Sanjay Chandra precedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
R/CR.MA/2600/2026 ORDER DATED: 10/03/2026crime sys
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 2600 of 2026
==========================================================
MAHAVEERSINH KANUBHA GOHIL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PUNIT R DAVE(11920) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR SATYAJIT S SONAGARA(12218) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK MEHTA ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)
No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 10/03/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Satyajit Sonagara appearing on behalf of
the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Hardik Mehta
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, 2023 for enlarging the applicant on
Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11198001250615 of
2025 registered with Nilambag Police Station, Bhavnagar, for the offence
punishable under Sections 3(5), 61, 308(4), 336(2), 336(3), 338 and 340(2) of
the BNS.
Page 1 of 4
R/CR.MA/2600/2026 ORDER DATED: 10/03/2026crime sys
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 no useful purpose would be served by keeping the
applicant in jail for indefinite period. 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.
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 the 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 allegation in the FIR being that the accused had forged
certain documents and had taken over the ownership of a
property.
(ii) The role attributed to the present applicant being limited to
having signed on application for getting electricity connection for
the shops in question.
(iii) The present applicant not alleged to have part played in the
principal conspiracy.
(iv) Though it appears that the present applicant has 7 antecedents
more particularly, it also prima facie appears that the present may
Page 2 of 4
R/CR.MA/2600/2026 ORDER DATED: 10/03/2026crime sys
be a member organized crime syndicate, yet it would appear that
in all other FIRs except the Gujctoc FIR, where the present
applicant is stated to be member of organized crime syndicate,
the present applicant has been released
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.
7. 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.
8. 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.11198001250615 of 2025 registered with Nilambag Police Station,
Bhavnagar, on executing a bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty 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 passport, if any, to the lower court within a week;
[d] not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the
Sessions Court concerned;
[e] furnish the present address of residence to the I.O. and also to the
Page 3 of 4
R/CR.MA/2600/2026 ORDER DATED: 10/03/2026crime sys
Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the
residence without prior intimation to the I.O.;
[f] mark presence once a fortnight for a period of six months before the
concerned police station.
(g) not to enter Bhavnagar city for a period of six months except
marking presence .
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 Court concerned will be
free to 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 stage of trial, the trial 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 considering the application of the applicant
for being released on regular bail.
12. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made
absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
Y.N. VYAS
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: YAGNESH NARENDRABHAI VYAS(HC00207), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 12/03/2026 14:14:16
Page 4 of 4
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.