SURESHBHAI RANCHHODBHAI TADVIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

    R/CR.MA/13340/2026                                ORDER DATED: 16/06/2026




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

   R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
               CHARGESHEET) NO. 13340 of 2026

==========================================================
                SURESHBHAI RANCHHODBHAI TADVI & ORS.
                               Versus
                         STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KISHAN K NAYI(13080) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR HARDIK MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                             Date : 16/06/2026

                                  ORDER


       Learned counsel for the applicants does not press this application qua
applicant Nos.1 and 2 namely Sureshbhai Ranchhodbhai Tadvi and
Bharatbhai @ Bhupin Gopalbhai Tadvi. Accordingly, present application
stands disposed of as not pressed qua applicant Nos.1 and 2.

[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. 11197008260239 of 2026 registered
with Chanod Police Station, Vadodara Rural, for the offences under
Sections 118(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 54 of BNS and Section 135 of the
G.P Act.

[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that
the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence.
Substantial part of investigation is over. Nothing is required to be recovered
or discovered. Role of the applicant Nos.3 and 4 are that applicant No.3 had
given kick blow and applicant No.4 caught hold the victim. He therefore
submits that, considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be
enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.


                                  Page 1 of 4
   R/CR.MA/13340/2026                                      ORDER DATED: 16/06/2026




[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 the applicant Nos. 3 and 4 along with
applicant Nos.1 and 2 inflicted stick blows on the head of the victim and
caused serious injuries on the head. Considering the gravity of offence, no
case is made out to entertain present bail application. 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)     Substantial part of investigation is over;
      (2)     Applicant Nos. 3 and 4 are behind the bar since 26.05.2026;
      (3)     There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the
              applicants;
      (4)     Injured is out of danger and discharged from the hospital;
      (5)     Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will take



                                   Page 2 of 4
    R/CR.MA/13340/2026                                  ORDER DATED: 16/06/2026




               its own 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 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 Nos.3 and 4 on
regular bail. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant Nos. 3
and 4 are ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR
being C.R. No. 11197008260239 of 2026 registered with Chanod Police
Station, Vadodara Rural, 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 he/she 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;


                                    Page 3 of 4
      R/CR.MA/13340/2026                                                       ORDER DATED: 16/06/2026




     (e)       mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in a week
               till filing of the chargesheet and after filing of the chargesheet,
               mark presence before the concerned police station once in a
               month for a period of six months; ;
     (f)       furnish the Aadhaar card, email ID/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/
               contact number 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.
     (h)       not to enter into village Ashodara, Taluka Dabhoi, till filing of
               the chargesheet except for marking presence before the
               concerned police station and/or for attending Court;

[9.0] The authorities will release the applicant Nos. 3 and 4 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 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)
SUCHIT

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: PATEL SUCHIT JAYESHBHAI(HC01083), Private Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 16/06/2026 18:44:33


                                                  Page 4 of 4