High Court of Gujarat
UDHAM SITARAM KAMODI GAUD (AADIVASI)versusSTATE 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 and ordered his release on bail.
Summary
Udham Sitaram Kamodi Gaud applied for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 after a charge‑sheet was filed for offences under Sections 109(2), 118(2), 117(2), 352, 54 of the BNS and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act. The applicant argued that he played a minor role, the injuries were caused by co‑accused, and he had no prior criminal record, so continued detention would serve no useful purpose. The State opposed bail, contending that the seriousness of the offences and the applicant’s alleged involvement warranted denial of liberty. The court examined the nature of the allegations, the applicant’s custody since 01‑09‑2025, and applied the Supreme Court’s principles from Sanjay Chandra v. CBI on bail discretion. Finding that the applicant’s role was peripheral and that bail would not prejudice the investigation, the court exercised its discretion to grant regular bail. Accordingly, the applicant was released on a Rs 10,000 bond with specified conditions.
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 nature of the offences and the applicant's alleged role justify denial of bail.
- Whether the applicant's custody since 01‑09‑2025 and lack of antecedent convictions affect the bail decision.
- How the principles laid down in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI (2012) apply to the exercise of bail discretion in this case.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(2), 117(2), 118(2), 352, 483, 54
- Gujarat Police Act — s. 135
Subjects
- regular bail
- charge sheet
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Gujarat Police Act
- criminal procedure
- Sanjay Chandra precedent
- co‑accused role
- bail discretion
Judgment
R/CR.MA/27664/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/01/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 27664 of 2025
==========================================================
UDHAM SITARAM KAMODI GAUD (ADIVASI)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BIPIN BHATT(1529) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR LB DABHI, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 05/01/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Bipin Bhatt appearing on
behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public
Prosecutor Mr.L.B.Dabhi 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 #led 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. 11199027250526/2025 registered with
Jambusar Police Station, Bharuch for the o6ence punishable
under Sections 109(2), 118(2), 117(2), 352, 54 of the BNS and
Section 135 of the G.P.Act.
Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/27664/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/01/2026
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 #led no useful purpose would be served by keeping
the applicant in jail for inde#nite 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 o6ence 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. While serious injuries have been in?icted upon the
complainant corresponding to o6ence punishable under
Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/27664/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/01/2026
Section 109(2) of the BNS, yet, it would appear that the
role attributed to the applicant is of having held the victim
whereas, the injuries have been in?icted by co-accused.
ii. The fact of the applicant being in custody since
01.09.2025 and the charge-sheet having been laid.
iii. The fact of the incident happening in the heat of the
moment and whereas, major role attributed to the co-
accused and not to the applicant.
iv. The fact of there being no antecedents of being involved
in any other o6ence against the present applicant.
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 #t case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the
applicant on regular bail.
Page 3 of 5
R/CR.MA/27664/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/01/2026
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. 11199027250526/2025 registered with
Jambusar Police Station, Bharuch, on executing a bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 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 month for a period of six months
before the concerned police station.
Page 4 of 5
R/CR.MA/27664/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/01/2026
9. The Authorities will release the applicant only if he is not
required in connection with any other o6ence 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
in?uenced 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)
Bhoomi
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: BHOOMI YOGESHBHAI MISTRY(HC01557), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 06/01/2026 12:56:39
Page 5 of 5
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.