High Court of Gujarat
ROHITBHAI @KALI RAMESHBHAI SARVAIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- HASMUKH D SUTHAR
Holding
The Court held that the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, subject to prescribed conditions, despite the charge‑sheet and the seriousness of the offences.
Summary
The applicant, Rohitbhai Sarvaiya, filed a regular bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, after a charge‑sheet was filed for offences under Sections 305(a), 331(3), 331(4), 317(4), 317(5) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The State opposed bail, arguing the applicant’s active role and risk of tampering with evidence. The Court examined the standard bail factors, noted that the investigation was complete, the trial would be lengthy, and the applicant enjoys a presumption of innocence despite two prior similar offences. Relying on Supreme Court precedents (Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor), the Court held that bail is a rule and jail an exception, and personal liberty under Article 21 must be protected. Consequently, the Court granted regular bail on a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with a surety and imposed several conditions, including surrender of passport and monthly police reporting.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted after the filing of a charge‑sheet under Section 483 BNSS.
- Whether the nature of the offences and the applicant’s prior antecedents preclude bail.
- Whether there is a reasonable risk of evidence tampering, witness intimidation, or absconding.
- How the Supreme Court’s bail jurisprudence applies to the present facts.
Legislation cited
Subjects
regular bailSection 483 BNSSBharatiya Nyaya Sanhitapresumption of innocencepersonal libertyArticle 21bail jurisprudenceconditions of bail
Judgment
R/CR.MA/13479/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 13479 of 2026
==============================================
ROHITBHAI @KALI RAMESHBHAI SARVAIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==============================================
Appearance:
MR. VIPUL SAVDAS REVDARIYA(14299) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 17/06/2026
ORDER
1) RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.
2) 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.11203025260100 of 2026
registered with Junagadh Taluka Police Station, Junagadh for
the offences under Sections 305(a), 331(3), 331(4), 317(4),
317(5) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3) Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence
and now nothing is required to be recovered or discovered.
Investigation is over and chargesheet has been filed. The applicant
has two past antecedents. He therefore submits that, considering
the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular
bail by imposing suitable conditions.
4) 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
is involved in the present offence and played an active role. There
is every possibility that, if the applicant is released on bail, he will
indulge in similar offences and try to tamper with the evidence.
Page 1 of 4
R/CR.MA/13479/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2026
Therefore, present application does not deserve consideration.
5) 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) 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) Offences are triable by the Court of JMFC;
(3) Applicant is behind the bars since 07.03.2026;
(4) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from
the applicant;
(5) The applicant is having two similar such offences
however the accused is governed by presumption of
innocence unless and until proved guilty;
(6) Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will
take some time.
7) 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
Page 2 of 4
R/CR.MA/13479/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2026
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) 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 being C.R. No.11203025260100 of 2026
registered with Junagadh Taluka Police Station, Junagadh 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/13479/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2026
(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) 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) 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 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) Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
ANKIT JANSARI
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE I, at High Court of Gujarat on 17/06/2026 14:53:51
Page 4 of 4
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "regular bail"Sign in to search