High Court of Gujarat
ARBAZKHAN DINESHBHAI RAJversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Decided
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- NIKHIL S KARIEL
Holding
The court held that, on the facts, the petitioners are entitled to regular bail, subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, aged 20 and 19, were arrested on 15 March 2026 for allegedly assisting in the hunting of a protected blue-bull species, alleged to have cleaned the animal after it was shot by a co‑accused. They filed applications for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, arguing that no charge‑sheet had been filed and they had no prior record. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the wildlife offences under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. The High Court considered the nature of the alleged conduct, the petitioners' young age, lack of antecedents, and the fact that the primary killing was attributed to another accused, and, relying on the Supreme Court’s principles in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, exercised its discretion to grant regular bail with stringent conditions. The order directed the release of the petitioners on bail of Rs 10,000 each, subject to sureties and multiple compliance conditions.
Issues considered
- The applicability of Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for granting regular bail before a charge‑sheet is filed.
- Whether the nature of offences under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 precludes the grant of regular bail.
- The relevance of the accused’s age and lack of prior record in exercising bail discretion.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 — s. 2(1), 2(14), 2(16)9a), 2(16)9b), 2(16)9c), 2(2), 2(35), 2(36), 2(38), 39, 50, 51, 52, 57, 9
Subjects
- regular bail
- wildlife protection
- protected species
- age of accused
- pre‑charge‑sheet bail
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Wildlife Protection Act
- Gujarat High Court
Judgment
R/CR.MA/7760/2026 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
CHARGESHEET) NO. 7760 of 2026
With
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 7775 of 2026
========================================================
ARBAZKHAN DINESHBHAI RAJ
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
========================================================
Appearance:
MR YUNUS U MALEK(5343) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK MEHTA ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 24/04/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Yunus Malek appearing on behalf of
the applicants 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 these applications under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the applicants on
Regular Bail in connection with FOR dated 15.03.2026 bearing No. 4 of
2026 registered with Range Forest Office, Anklav, District: Anand for
the offence punishable under Sections 2(1), 2(14), 2(16)9a)(b)(c), 2(2)),
Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/7760/2026 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
2(35), 2(36), 2(38), 9, 39, 50, 51, 52 and 57 of the Wildlife Protection Act,
1972.
4. Learned Advocate for the applicants would submit that considering
the role attributed to the applicants, and nature of the allegation levelled, the
applicants may be enlarged on regular bail. It is further submitted that since
the charge-sheet is not filed, no useful purpose would be served by keeping
the applicants in jail for indefinite period. It is further contended that the
applicants are 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 applicants, this Court may not exercise the
discretion in favour of the applicants and the application may be dismissed.
6. This Court has heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the
respective parties and perused the papers. Following aspects are considered:-
(i) The allegation being that the accused had hunted blue-bull,
i.e. a protected species.
(ii) The specific allegation against the present applicants prima
facie appears to be that the present applicants, had cleaned the animal
trace after it had been shot dead by co-accused.
Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/7760/2026 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
(iii) This Court has considered the fact of the applicants are 20
years and 19 years old ( Criminal Misc. Application No. 7760 of 2026
and Criminal Misc. Application No. 7775 of 2026), in custody since
15.03.2026 without any antecedents.
(iv) This Court has also considered the submission of learned APP
that the allegation of killing the animal, is levelled against co-accused
Anwar, who allegedly killed the animal using a firearm which he had.
(v) Considering the above, more particularly having regard to the
age of the applicants, this Court is inclined to allow this application,
albeit with appropriate safeguards.
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 applicants 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
applicants on regular bail.
8. Hence, the present applications are allowed. The applicants are
Page 3 of 5
R/CR.MA/7760/2026 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
ordered to be released on bail in connection with FOR dated 15.03.2026
bearing No. 4 of 2026 registered with Range Forest Office, Anklav,
District: Anand, on executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand only) each with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction
of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that they 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 before the concerned police station. once a week till
charge-sheet is filed and once a month for a period of six months
thereafter.
9. The Authorities will release the applicants only if they are 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.
Page 4 of 5
R/CR.MA/7760/2026 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
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)
NIRU
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: NIRU ROSHAN SHAH(HC00211), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 27/04/2026 10:54:09
Page 5 of 5
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.