AASIF S/O. RAFIKBHAI KASAMBHAI SHAIKHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- HASMUKH D SUTHAR
Holding
The Court granted regular bail to the applicant, finding that the circumstances warranted the exercise of discretion in favor of liberty.
Summary
The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for offences alleged under Sections 309(4) and 54 of the same Act, arising from a robbery involving a mobile phone, cash and a Bluetooth device. The State opposed bail, arguing the gravity of the offence, a pending separate FIR for a related vehicle theft, and the risk of the applicant fleeing or tampering with evidence. The Court examined the principles governing bail, noting that a substantial part of the investigation was complete, no further recovery was required, and the applicant had been in custody since 28/05/2026. Citing Supreme Court precedents (Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor) and the constitutional guarantee of liberty under Article 21, the Court held that pre‑trial detention would amount to a de facto conviction. Consequently, the Court granted regular bail on a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with a surety of equal amount, subject to detailed conditions regarding residence, passport surrender, police reporting, and prohibition of illegal activity.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the accused under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 considering the nature and gravity of the alleged offences.
- Whether there is a reasonable risk of the accused absconding, tampering with evidence, or influencing witnesses.
- Whether the completed investigation and lack of further recovery justify bail despite the State's objections.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023s. 309(4), s. 483, s. 54
- Constitution of Indias. Article 21
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.MA/15241/2026 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
CHARGESHEET) NO. 15241 of 2026
==========================================================
AASIF S/O. RASIKBHAI KASAMBHAI SHAIKH & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MOHDDANISH M BAREJIA(10612) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR ADITYA JADEJA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 09/07/2026
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.11192006260150 of 2026 registered with Kerala
GIDC Police Station, Ahmedabad Rural, for the offences under
Sections 309(4), 54 of BNS, 2023.
[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. He therefore
submits that, considering the nature of the offence, the applicant
may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
[4.0] Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has
Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/15241/2026 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2026
opposed the present application and requested to dismiss the
present application for regular bail on the ground that the
applicant is very much involved in the present offence and
considering the gravity of offence, no case is made out to entertain
present bail application. Further, during the course of the offence
alleged, another offence is committed i.e. from the looted mobile,
online four wheel came to be booked and thereafter the said
vehicle came to be sold. Chargesheet is yet to be filed. If the
applicant is released on bail, possibility cannot be ruled out that
the applicant will flee from justice and tamper with the evidence.
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. Allegation
against the present applicant is that he was travelling along with
Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/15241/2026 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2026
the co-accused in rickshaw and at that time pointed knife to the
complainant and robbed mobile worth Rs.15,000/-, cash of Rs.190/-
as well as wireless blue-tooth worth Rs.500/-. Qua another offence
as aforesaid by learned APP, separate FIR is registered and present
applicant is enlarged on bail. Following aspects have been
considered:
(1) Substantial part of investigation is over;
(2) Applicant is behind the bar since 28/05/2026;
(3) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the
applicant;
(4) He is not named in the FIR initially and during the
course of investigation his name is revealed and thereby he
has been arraigned as an accused;
(5) Remand is over;
(6) Muddamal is recovered;
(7) Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will
take its own time;
(8) Though the applicant is having past antecedent, he is
presumed to be innocent till proven guilty;
[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
Page 3 of 5
R/CR.MA/15241/2026 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2026
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 being
C.R.No.11192006260150 of 2026 registered with Kerala
GIDC Police Station, Ahmedabad Rural, 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/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;
(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
Page 4 of 5
R/CR.MA/15241/2026 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2026
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;
[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)
ILA
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ILA PRAFULKUMAR PATEL(HC00194), Principal Pvt Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 09/07/2026 18:16:06
Page 5 of 5
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.