ASHWIN MANUBHAI SOLANKIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

    R/CR.MA/10926/2026                                ORDER DATED: 07/05/2026




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

    R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
                CHARGESHEET) NO. 10926 of 2026

==========================================================
                         ASHWIN MANUBHAI SOLANKI
                                  Versus
                            STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. KISHAN H DAIYA(6929) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ROHAN RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                                 Date : 07/05/2026

                                     ORDER


[1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.


[2.0] The present application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in
connection with FIR No.Part-A11210021260058 of 2026 registered with
Katargam Police Station, Surat for the offences under Sections 103 (1),
189 (2), 189 (4), 191 (2), 191 (3), 190, 238(A), 54 of BNS, 2023 and Section
135 of the Gujarat Police Act.


[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence. He
submits that the applicant is not named in FIR and he is owner of a Pan Shop
wherein DVR of the CCTV was installed. He submits that the applicant has
removed that DVR at the instance of his brother Prafulbhai, who is an
advocate, to hand it over to police. Subsequently, he has informed one
Mr.Mangesh not to disclose his name before the police for removal of DVR
and handing it over to his brother. Except, there is no role attributed to the
applicant. He therefore submits that, considering the nature of the offence,



                                     Page 1 of 4
    R/CR.MA/10926/2026                                         ORDER DATED: 07/05/2026




the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable
conditions.


[4.0] Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed
the present application and requested to dismiss the present application for
regular bail on the ground that there are serious allegations against the
applicant     and,       therefore,   present    application    does     not     deserve
consideration.


[5.0] While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the
accused in the alleged offence, the jurisdiction to grant bail has to be
exercised on the basis of the well settled principles having regard to the
facts and circumstances of each case and the following factors are to be
taken into consideration while considering an application for bail: (i) the
nature of accusation and the severity of the punishment and the nature of
the materials relied upon by the prosecution; (ii) reasonable apprehension
of tampering with the witnesses and threat to the complainant or the
witnesses; (iii) reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the
accused at the time of trial or the likelihood of his abscondence; (iv)
character behaviour and standing of the accused and the circumstances
which are peculiar to the accused; (v) larger interest of the public or the
State and similar other considerations are required to be considered.


[6.0] I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the
respective parties and perused the investigation papers. Following aspects
have been considered:
(1) None of the offence alleged is punishable with life sentence or death
penalty;
(2) Applicant is behind the bars since 13.01.2026;
(3) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant;
(4) Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will take some time.
(5) Co-accused is considered by the coordinate Bench and on the ground of


                                        Page 2 of 4
    R/CR.MA/10926/2026                                  ORDER DATED: 07/05/2026




parity also, applicant may be enlarged on bail.


[7.0] This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation reported in [2012]1 SCC 40 as well as in the case of
Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court of
Andhra Pradesh reported in (1978)1 SCC 240. Obviously, the conclusion of
trial will take time and keeping the accused behind the bars is nothing but
amounts to pre-trial conviction and therefore, considering the celebrated
principle of bail jurisprudence is that “bail is a rule and jail is exception” as
well as the concept of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India, present application deserves consideration.


[8.0] In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature
of the allegations made against the applicant in the FIR, 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.
Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be
released on regular bail in connection with FIR No.Part-A11210021260058
of 2026 registered with Katargam Police Station, Surat on executing a
personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five 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 & shall
not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and shall not to play
mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;
(c) surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a week;
(d) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Trial Court
concerned;
(e) mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in every month
for a period of six months between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;


                                    Page 3 of 4
         R/CR.MA/10926/2026                                                              ORDER DATED: 07/05/2026




  (f) furnish the present address of his residence to the Investigating Officer
  and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not
  change the residence without prior permission of Trial Court;
  (g) not to indulge in any illegal activity failing which learned trial Court shall
  issue warrant and cancel the bail of the applicant.


  [9.0] The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in
  connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the
  above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to
  issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.


  [10.0] 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.


  [11.0] At the trial, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations
  of preliminary nature qua the evidence at this stage made by this Court
  while enlarging the applicant on bail.


  [12.0] Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
  permitted.


                                                                                  (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
  R.S. MALEK


Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: RIYAZMIYA SABIRMIYA MALEK(HC00180), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 07/05/2026 16:17:44




                                                          Page 4 of 4