High Court of Gujarat
BIPINBHAI VASTABHAI VAKATARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Decided
- Disposal
- 44-PARTLY ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- NIKHIL S KARIEL
Holding
The Court held that, on a prima facie basis, regular bail could be granted to applicant No.2 under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Summary
The applicants filed a regular bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking bail for applicant No.2 who was found in a vehicle transporting prohibited liquor and is charged under Sections 65(a), 65(e), 81 and 98(2) of the Prohibition Act. The applicant argued that, given the lack of specific allegations against him and his clean antecedent record, bail should be granted, especially since the charge‑sheet had already been filed. The State opposed, contending that the nature of the offence and the applicant's role warranted denial of bail. The Court, referring to the Supreme Court’s decision in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, held that the facts prima facie justified the exercise of discretion to grant bail. Consequently, the Court ordered the release of applicant No.2 on a bail bond of Rs.25,000 with one surety, subject to several conditions including surrender of passport, residence reporting, and monthly police verification.
Issues considered
- The applicability of Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for granting regular bail to applicant No.2.
- Whether the nature of the alleged offence under the Prohibition Act precludes the grant of bail.
- The discretion of the court to grant bail in the absence of specific allegations and prior antecedents.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Prohibition Act — s. 65(a), 65(e), 81, 98(2)
Subjects
- regular bail
- Section 483
- Prohibition Act
- bail conditions
- court discretion
- preliminary hearing
Judgment
R/CR.MA/4849/2026 ORDER DATED: 25/02/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
CHARGESHEET) NO. 4849 of 2026
==========================================================
BIPINBHAI VASTABHAI VAKATAR & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. MAULIK M SONI(7249) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR JAY MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 25/02/2026
ORAL ORDER
Learned advocate for the applicants does not press this
application qua applicant No.1. Hence, the present application
stands disposed of as not pressed qua applicant No.1.
So far as applicant Nos.2 is concerned, this matter is taken
up for nal disposal only qua applicant No.2.
1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Soni appearing on behalf of the
applicants and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. 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 led this application under Section 483 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the
applicant No.2 on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R.
No.11202025260029/2026 registered with Jodiya Police
Station, Jamnagar for the o/ence punishable under Sections
65(a), 65(e), 81 & 98(2) of the Prohibition Act.
Page 1 of 4
R/CR.MA/4849/2026 ORDER DATED: 25/02/2026
5. Learned advocate for the applicant would submit that
considering the role attributed to the applicant No.2, and nature
of the allegation levelled, the applicant No.2 may be enlarged on
regular bail. It is further submitted that the since charge-sheet is
led, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the
applicant No.2 in jail for inde nite period. It is further contended
that the applicant No.2 is ready and willing to abide by the
conditions that may be imposed by this Court if released on bail.
6. 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 o/ence and the role attributed to the present
applicant No.2 as coming out from the charge-sheet, this Court
may not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant No.2
and the application may be dismissed.
7. I have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the
respective parties and perused the papers. Following aspects are
considered:-
i. The applicant No.2 found in the car where the
prohibited liquor was being transported.
ii. The fact that no speci c allegation is levelled and
there being no antecedents against the present applicant
No.2.
This Court has taken into consideration the law laid down
by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v.
Page 2 of 4
R/CR.MA/4849/2026 ORDER DATED: 25/02/2026
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 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 No.2 on regular
bail.
9. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant
No.2 is ordered to be released on bail in connection with F.I.R.
registered as C.R. No.11202025260029/2026 registered with
Jodiya Police Station, Jamnagar, on executing a bond of
Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousands 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] shall furnish the present address of residence to the
Investigating OCcer and also to the Court at the time of
execution of the bond and shall not change the residence
without prior intimation to the Investigating OCcer;
[h] mark his presence before the concerned police Station
Page 3 of 4
R/CR.MA/4849/2026 ORDER DATED: 25/02/2026
once a month for a period of six months before the concerned
Police Station;
10. The Authorities will release the applicant No.2 only he is
not required in connection with any other o/ence 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.
11. 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.
12. At the stage of trial, the trial court shall not be inDuenced
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 No.2 for being released on regular
bail.
13. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms qua
applicant No.2. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct service is permitted.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
KUMAR ALOK
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ALOK KUMAR(HC01091), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 27/02/2026 11:17:13
Page 4 of 4
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.