High Court of Gujarat
MANOHARLAL BABULAL HEMARAM BHADU (BISNOI)versusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- HASMUKH D SUTHAR
Holding
The court held that, given the nature of the offences, the substantial progress of investigation, and the parity with co‑accused, the applicant is entitled to regular bail.
Summary
The applicant, Manoharlal Bhabu, sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for alleged offences of transporting contraband liquor and using a forged vehicle number plate under Sections 336(2), 336(3), 430(2) of the BNSS and the Gujarat Prohibition Act. The State opposed bail, arguing the gravity of the offence, risk of flight and evidence tampering, and that a chargesheet had not yet been filed. The Court examined factors such as the nature of the accusation, the progress of investigation, the fact that the offences do not carry life or death sentences, and the parity principle since co‑accused had been granted bail. Relying on Supreme Court precedents (Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor) and the principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception, the Court found a prima facie case for bail. Consequently, the application was allowed and the applicant was released on regular bail subject to a personal bond and several conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted under Section 483 BNSS before the filing of a chargesheet when investigation is substantially complete.
- Whether the seriousness of the alleged contraband liquor offence and use of a forged number plate precludes bail.
- Whether the principle of parity with co‑accused already on bail warrants granting bail to the applicant.
- Whether there is a reasonable risk of the applicant absconding or tampering with evidence.
- How Supreme Court precedents on bail (Sanjay Chandra v. CBI; Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor) apply to the present case.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023s. 336(2), s. 336(3), s. 430(2)
Subjects
regular bailpre‑trial detentionBharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitacontraband liquorforged number platebail jurisprudenceArticle 21Gujarat Prohibition Actparity principleconditions of bail
Judgment
R/CR.MA/16063/2026 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
CHARGESHEET) NO. 16063 of 2026
==========================================================
MANOHARLAL BABULAL HEMARAM BHADU (BISHNOI)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR AR PATHAN(6194) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
O I PATHAN(7684) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR VINAY VISHEN, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 15/07/2026
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.11206020260541 of 2026 registered with Kadi Police
Station, Mahesana, for the offences under Sections 336(2),
336(3) and 430(2) of BNS and under the provisions of the Gujarat
Prohibition 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. Co-accused is
released by this Court. Allegation against the applicant is that
along with co-accused, the applicant was found transporting
contraband IMFL i.e. 2900 bottles by forging the number plate of
Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/16063/2026 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2026
the vehicle involved in the offence alleged. 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
opposed the present application and requested to dismiss the
present application for regular bail on the ground that the
applicant with co-accused by affixing forged number plate on the
car carrying contraband liquor and caught red handed. Considering
the gravity of offence, no case is made out to entertain present bail
application. Chargesheet is yet to be filed and if he 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.
Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/16063/2026 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2026
[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) None of the offence alleged is punishable with life
sentence or death penalty;
(3) Applicant is behind the bar since 27/05/2026;
(4) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the
applicant;
(5) Co-accused having similarly situated role are enlarged
on regular bail and therefore, on the ground of parity also
(Rameshbhai Batubhai Dhabi Vs. State of Gujarat
reported in 2011 (3) GLR 1999), present application
deserves consideration;
(6) Offence is triable by JMFC Court;
(7) Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will
take 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.
Page 3 of 5
R/CR.MA/16063/2026 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2026
[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.11206020260541 of 2026 registered with Kadi Police
Station, Mahesana, on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/-
(Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) with one local 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 India 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
Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not
change the residence/contact number without prior
Page 4 of 5
R/CR.MA/16063/2026 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2026
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 15/07/2026 17:57:20
Page 5 of 5
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