PRAVINBHAI @ MEKSHABHAI NATUBHAI PARMARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- HASMUKH D SUTHAR
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to regular bail, subject to a personal bond and conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Pravinbhai Natubhai Parmar, applied for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with an FIR alleging offences under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 and sections of the BNSS. The petitioner claimed innocence, no prior record, and that co‑accused had already been granted bail, invoking parity. The State opposed, arguing the gravity of the alleged offences and that a chargesheet had not yet been filed. The Court examined factors such as the nature of the accusation, the stage of investigation, the applicant’s clean antecedent, and precedent on bail jurisprudence, including the principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception. Concluding that the case met the criteria for bail, the Court ordered the petitioner released on regular bail with a personal bond and several conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted under Section 483 BNSS before the filing of a chargesheet.
- Whether the nature of the offences under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act warrants denial of bail.
- Whether parity with co‑accused already on bail obliges the court to grant bail to the petitioner.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of antecedents and the stage of investigation justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023s. 114(2), s. 4, s. 483
- Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956s. 3, s. 4, s. 5, s. 7
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.MA/16661/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/07/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
CHARGESHEET) NO. 16661 of 2026
==========================================================
PRAVINBHAI @ MEKSHABHAI NATUBHAI PARMAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
K T BELADIYA(9101) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR H K PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 21/07/2026
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. 11210046260481 of 2026 registered
with Puna Police Station, Surat, for the offences under Sections 3, 4, 5 and
7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 and Sections 114(2) and 4 of
BNS.
[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. The applicant has no past antecedent. Co-accused are
granted bail by the Sessions Court and on the ground of parity also,
applicant may be enlarged on bail. 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 is very much involved in the
present offence and considering the gravity of offence, no case is made out
to entertain present bail application. Chargesheet is yet to be filed.
Page 1 of 4
R/CR.MA/16661/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/07/2026
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) None of the offence alleged is punishable with life sentence or
death penalty ;
(3) Applicant is behind the bar since 23.06.2026;
(4) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the
applicant;
(5) No past antecedent.
(6) Co-accused having similarly situated role is 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.
(7) Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will take
Page 2 of 4
R/CR.MA/16661/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/07/2026
its own time.
(8) Role of the applicant is that, in connivance with co-accused, he
used to provide customers for illegal activities and from
women, he used to get commission. Except this, no role is
played by the applicant.
[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 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.
11210046260481 of 2026 registered with Puna 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/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;
Page 3 of 4
R/CR.MA/16661/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/07/2026
(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 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 territory of Puna Police Station for a period
of six months except for marking presence before the
concerned police station and/or for attending Court;
[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)
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 21/07/2026 14:48:57
Page 4 of 4
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.