High Court of Gujarat
VIPUL @ NAGIYA GYANDEV NAGREversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH
- Bench
- M R MENGDEY
Holding
The court held that, given the absence of framed charges, the applicant’s custody since 2021, and the statutory considerations, regular bail should be granted under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Summary
The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with an FIR (C.R. No.11210047212468 of 2021) alleging that he inflicted knife blows on the deceased. The State opposed bail, arguing the applicant’s active participation in the offence and that co‑accused who had not caused injury were granted bail, making the applicant’s case distinct. The court examined the status of the trial, noting that the charge sheet had been filed but no charges were framed and the discharge applications of co‑accused were pending, and considered the Supreme Court’s three‑factor test (prima facie case, risk of fleeing, and potential witness tampering). Relying on the precedent of Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and the statutory factors, the court concluded that bail could be granted. The applicant was ordered released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000 with one surety and complying with several conditions, including not tampering with witnesses and reporting monthly to the police station.
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 act of inflicting knife blows precludes the grant of bail.
- Whether the factors of prima facie case, risk of flight, and potential witness tampering justify bail in the present circumstances.
- Whether a successive bail application is maintainable after the withdrawal of an earlier bail application.
Legislation cited
Subjects
regular bailcharge sheetBharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitasuccessive bail applicationprima facie casewitness tamperingcriminal procedure
Judgment
R/CR.MA/27721/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 27721 of 2025
==========================================================
VIPUL @ NAGIYA GYANDEV NAGRE
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS KHUSBHU VYAS for MR AMIT D SHAH(11232) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR MEET THAKKAR, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 13/02/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. 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.11210047212468 of 2021 registered with Udhana Police
Station, Surat.
2. Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant and learned APP
for the Respondent – State.
Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on
behalf of the Respondent - State.
3. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the
Applicant has good reputation in the society and 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.
Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/27721/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2026
4. Per contra, learned APP has opposed the present
application for grant of regular bail contending that the present
applicant had inflicted knife blows upon the deceased. Thus,
there is an active participation on the part of the present
applicant in commission of the offence in question. He further
submitted that the other co-accused, who have been considered
for grant of bail had not inflicted any injury to the deceased and
therefore, the parity cannot be drawn with those co-accused as
regards the present applicant. Learned APP has therefore
submitted that looking to the nature of offence, this Court may
not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant and the
Application may be dismissed.
5. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the
record. The investigation is over and charge sheet is filed. The
applicant had earlier preferred the Criminal Misc. Application
No.3348 of 2025, which was allowed to be withdrawn by this
Court vide order dated 04.08.2025 and thereafter, the applicant
had preferred the present successive application. This Court vide
order dated 30.01.2026 had asked the learned concerned Court
to submit its report as regards the status of trial. Accordingly,
the learned Sessions Court, Surat has submitted its report as
regards the status of trial which indicates till date, even charge
has not been framed against the accused persons and the
discharge application filed by the co-accused is still pending. The
applicant has been arrested in connection with the present
offence on 24.08.2021 and since then, he is in custody. Having
regard to these aspects, the Application deserves consideration.
This court has also considered the following aspects:
Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/27721/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2026
(a) As per catena of decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, there
are mainly 3 factors which are required to be considered by this
court i.e. prima facie case, availability of Applicant accused at
the time of trial and tampering and hampering with the
witnesses by the accused.
(b) That the learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted
that the Applicant Accused is not likely to flee away.
(c) That the Applicant is in custody since 24.08.2021.
(d) The law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Sanjay Chandra v. C.B.I. Reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40.
6. Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties and
perusing the record produced in this case as well as taking into
consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, gravity
of accusation, availability of the Applicant Accused at the time of
Trial etc. and the role attributed to the present Applicant
accused, the present Application deserves to be allowed and
accordingly stands allowed. This Court has also gone through
the FIR and police papers and also the earlier order passed by
the learned Sessions Court where the learned Sessions Judge
has disallowed the bail Application at initial stage. The Applicant
Accused is ordered to be released on bail in connection with the
aforesaid FIR on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with
one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial
Court, subject to the following conditions that he shall:
(a) not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or
promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as
to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any
Police Officer or tamper with the evidence.
Page 3 of 5
R/CR.MA/27721/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2026
(b) maintain law and order and not to indulge in any criminal
activities.
(c) furnish the documentary proof of complete, correct and
present address of residence to the Investigating Officer and to
the Trial Court at the time of executing the bond and shall not
change the residence without prior permission of the trial Court.
(d) provide contact numbers as well as the contact numbers of
the sureties before the Trial Court. In case of change in such
numbers inform in writing immediately to the trial Court.
(e) mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in a
month between 11:00 a.m. and 2.00 pm.
(f) file an affidavit stating his immovable properties whether self
acquired or ancestral with description, location and present
value of such properties before the Trial Court, if any.
(g) not leave the territory of Gujarat without prior permission of
the Trial Court
(h) surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a week. If
the Applicant does not possess passport, shall file an Affidavit to
that effect.
7. Bail bond to be executed before the Trial Court having
jurisdiction to try the case. It would be open for the Trial Court
concerned to give time to furnish the solvency certificate if
prayed for.
8. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the
Trial Court concerned will be free to issue warrant or take
appropriate action according to law. The Authorities will release
the Applicant forthwith only if the Applicant is not required in
connection with any other offence for the time being.
Page 4 of 5
R/CR.MA/27721/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2026
9. At the trial, the concerned trial Court shall not be
influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in
the present order.
10. Rule is made absolute. Direct service permitted.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J)
AHS
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: AMIT SONAGARA(HCD0079), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE TWO CLASS TWO, at High Court of Gujarat on 16/02/2026 16:48:08
Page 5 of 5
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