High Court of Gujarat
DARSHAN @ LALU GOKULBHAI CHAUDHARIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- HASMUKH D SUTHAR
Holding
The Court held that regular bail is appropriate in the present case and granted it with conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Darshan @ Lalu Gokulbhai Chaudhary, filed a regular bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, after a chargesheet was filed for offences under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The State opposed bail, citing 13 eyewitnesses and the risk that the accused might tamper with evidence or commit further offences. The Court examined the limited role of the accused—only alleged to have caught hold of the deceased—and noted that the investigation was complete, the accused had no prior record, and there was no material to be recovered from him. Relying on established bail principles and Supreme Court precedents (Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor), the Court held that pre‑trial detention would amount to a de facto conviction. Consequently, the Court granted regular bail with a personal bond of Rs.25,000 and a set of conditions to ensure the accused’s appearance and prevent interference with the investigation.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted after the filing of a chargesheet for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the accused’s alleged involvement and the presence of eyewitnesses justify denial of bail.
- How the principles laid down in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor apply to this bail application.
Legislation cited
Subjects
regular bailchargesheetpre‑trial detentionpersonal libertyArticle 21Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitawitness tamperingGujarat High Court
Judgment
R/CR.MA/16116/2026 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 16116 of 2026
==============================================
DARSHAN @ LALU GOKULBHAI CHAUDHARI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==============================================
Appearance:
MR. RAAJEN D JADHAV(10026) 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
Leave to amend. Amendment be carried out forthwith.
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.11214046260383 of 2026
registered with Palsana Police Station, Surat for the offences
under Sections 103(1), 189(2), 191(2), 190, 332(A), 115(2), 352
and 351(3) 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. 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 there are 13
eye-witnesses who are supporting the case of prosecution as the
Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/16116/2026 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2026
applicant is involved in the present offence and played an active
role by caught hold the deceased. The co-accused released on bail
as their roles are lesser than the role of the present applicant more
particularly either they have provoked the co-accused Pawan to
assault or either remained present on the spot of incident. 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.
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) During the Dhuleti Festival keeping the grudge or
earlier incident the accused persons trespassed the
house of the complainant and assaulted the deceased
by breaking glass window and with a piece of glass
inflicted on the wrist of the victim by the co-accused
Pawan and due to such injury the victim succumbed to
the injury. The role attributed to the applicant is that
Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/16116/2026 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2026
he only caught hold of the deceased. Except this no
role is attributed and not even inflicted any fatal injury
or any injury to the deceased by the applicant.
Considering the limited role of the applicant present
application deserves consideration.;
(2) Investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed;
(3) Applicant is a 22 year old boy who is behind the bars
since 05.03.2026;
(4) The applicant has no past antecedents;
(5) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from
the applicant;
(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
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
Page 3 of 5
R/CR.MA/16116/2026 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2026
connection with FIR being C.R. No.11214046260383 of 2026
registered with Palsana Police Station, Surat 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.;
(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
Page 4 of 5
R/CR.MA/16116/2026 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2026
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 ONE, at High Court of Gujarat on 15/07/2026 14:34:10
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