MAHAMMAD SHAFI @ CHAPPARIYO ABDULGANI GANIHUSEN KURESHIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- HASMUKH D SUTHAR
Holding
The Court allowed the application and granted regular bail to the petitioners with conditions.
Summary
The petitioners Mahammad Shafi and others applied for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, after a charge‑sheet was filed for offences under Section 325 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and several provisions of the Gujarat Animal Preservation Act. They had been in custody since 23 February 2026, had no prior criminal record, and a co‑accused had already been released, prompting a claim of parity. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The Court examined established bail principles, noting that the offences do not attract life imprisonment or death, the investigation was complete, and continued detention would amount to pre‑trial punishment. Relying on precedents such as Ramesh Batukbhai Dabhi v. State of Gujarat, Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor, the Court held that bail was appropriate and granted regular bail with a personal bond and several conditions. The order also directed that any breach of conditions could lead to cancellation of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted after the filing of a charge‑sheet for offences under Section 325 BNS and the Gujarat Animal Preservation Act.
- Whether the nature and gravity of the offences, the absence of prior antecedents, and parity with a co‑accused released justify bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.MA/12779/2026 ORDER DATED: 10/06/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 12779 of 2026
==========================================================
MAHAMMAD SHAFI @ CHAPPARIYO ABDULGANI GANIHUSEN KURESHI
& ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NADEEM B MANSURI(11332) for the applicants(s) No. 1,2
MS VRUNDA SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 10/06/2026
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 Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for
regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11204046260111
of 2026 registered with Nadiad Town Police Station, District
Kheda for the offence punishable under Section 325 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) and sections 5(1)
(1A), 6B, 8(2), 8(4) and 10 of the Gujarat Animal Preservation Act.
[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants
submits that applicants are innocent and have been falsely
implicated in the offence and now nothing is required to be
recovered or discovered. He therefore submits that, considering
the nature of the offence, the applicants may be enlarged on
Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/12779/2026 ORDER DATED: 10/06/2026
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 looking to the nature and
gravity of the offence.
[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) Investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed;
(2) None of the offence alleged is punishable with life sentence
or death penalty and is triable by the Court of Magistrate;
Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/12779/2026 ORDER DATED: 10/06/2026
(3) Applicants are behind the bars since 23.02.2026;
(4) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the
applicants;
(5) The applicants are not having any past antecedent;
(6) Similarly situated co-accused has been released by the
coordinate Bench and hence, applicants are entitled to get
the benefit of parity in view of decision in the case of Ramesh
Batukbhai Dabhi vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2011 (3)
GLR 1150;
(7) Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will take
some time.
[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 applicants 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
Page 3 of 5
R/CR.MA/12779/2026 ORDER DATED: 10/06/2026
enlarge the applicants on regular bail. Hence, the present
application is allowed. The applicants is ordered to be released on
regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11204046260111
of 2026 registered with Nadiad Town Police Station, District
Kheda on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees
Twenty-five 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 & 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 a month for a period of six months between 11.00 a.m.
and 2.00 p.m.;
(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 similar activity failing which
prosecution / IO shall file application for cancellation of
bail.
[9.0] The authorities will release the applicants only if they are not
Page 4 of 5
R/CR.MA/12779/2026 ORDER DATED: 10/06/2026
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 applicants on bail.
[12.0] Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct
service is permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)
Ajay
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: AJAY CHANDRAN MENON(HC00939), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 10/06/2026 16:34:09
Page 5 of 5
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.