High Court of Gujarat
BHAILALBHAI MANORBHAI PADHIYARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Decided
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- NIKHIL S KARIEL
Holding
The Court held that the applicant is entitled to regular bail and ordered his release on bail.
Summary
The applicant, Bhailabhai Manorbhai Padhiyar, sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with an FIR alleging violation of the Prohibition Act by permitting co‑accused to use his agricultural field for distributing prohibited liquor and receiving a modest commission. The State opposed bail, arguing the nature of the offence warranted denial. The Court examined the limited role of the applicant, the absence of any prior criminal record, and the principle that bail should not be denied merely on the seriousness of the alleged offence. Relying on the Supreme Court’s guidance in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, the Court held that the applicant was entitled to bail. Consequently, the application was allowed, and the applicant was released on bail subject to standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is eligible for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 despite the alleged offences under the Prohibition Act.
- Whether the applicant's alleged role—allowing use of his field and receiving a small commission—justifies denial of bail.
- How the precedent set in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation ([2012] 1 SCC 40) applies to the discretion of granting bail in this case.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Prohibition Act — s. 116(B), 65(a), 65(e), 81, 83, 98(2)
Subjects
- regular bail
- Prohibition Act
- liquor smuggling
- Gujarat
- Section 483
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- bail conditions
- Sanjay Chandra precedent
Judgment
R/CR.MA/9583/2026 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
CHARGESHEET) NO. 9583 of 2026
==========================================================
BHAILABHAI MANORBHAI PADHIYAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR FENIL H BATHIYA(13663) 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 : 24/04/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Fenil Bathiya 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. 11215003260182/2026 registered with
Aanklav Police Station, Anand for the offence punishable
under Sections 65(a), 65(e), 81, 83, 98(2), 116(B) of the
Prohibition Act.
Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/9583/2026 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
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 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, 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 being that the accused had indulged in
bringing prohibited liquor in the State of Gujarat.
ii. The allegation against the present applicant being that
Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/9583/2026 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
he had permitted the co-accused, who had brought in liquor
from out of Gujarat, to use his agricultural field to
distribute the prohibited liquor.
iii. The applicant, even as per the FIR, was to receive a
small amount of commission of Rs.10,000/- for the same.
iv. No other allegation of being involved in principal offence
are alleged against the present applicant.
v. This Court has also noted that the applicant has no
antecedent of being involved in any offence whatsoever.
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.
Page 3 of 5
R/CR.MA/9583/2026 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
registered as C.R. No. 11215003260182/2026 registered with
Aanklav Police Station, Anand, 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 fortnight till the charge-sheet is
filed and thereafter once a month for a period of three
months before the concerned police station.
9. The Authorities will release the applicant only if he is not
Page 4 of 5
R/CR.MA/9583/2026 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
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)
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 27/04/2026 11:07:43
Page 5 of 5
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.