SAJIDALI GULAMRASUL SAIYEDversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- HASMUKH D SUTHAR
Holding
The Court held that regular bail should be granted to the applicant subject to a personal bond and specified conditions.
Summary
The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with a FIR alleging receipt of illegal gratification under several sections of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The charge‑sheet had already been filed and the applicant had been in custody since April 2026. The applicant offered an affidavit‑cum‑undertaking to undergo a voice spectrography test and presented no risk of tampering or absconding. The State opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence and the pending spectrography test. The Court, applying established bail principles and citing Supreme Court precedents, found no compelling reason to continue pre‑trial detention and granted regular bail with a personal bond and several conditions. The bail order directed the applicant to surrender his passport, report monthly to police, and comply with the undertaking, among other conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted after the filing of a charge‑sheet in a corruption case under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
- Whether the nature of the alleged offence and the risk of tampering, absconding, or influencing witnesses justify denial of bail.
- Whether the applicant's undertaking to undergo voice spectrography and other conditions mitigate the risk of misuse of liberty.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023s. 483
- Prevention of Corruption Acts. 12, s. 13(1)(a), s. 13(2), s. 7(a), s. 7A
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.MA/17006/2026 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 17006 of 2026
==========================================================
SAJIDALI GULARASUL SAIYED
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR AMIT M BAROT(5868) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ADITYA JADEJA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 11/08/2026
ORDER
[1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-
State.
[2.0] The present application is led under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for
regular bail in connection with FIR being
C.R.No.11194029260001 of 2026 registered with Vadodara
City ACB Police Station, Vadodara City, for the o.ences under
Sections 7(a), 7A, 12, 13(1)(a), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption
Act.
[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant
submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely
implicated in the o.ence. Investigation is over and charge-sheet
has been led. He has further submitted that applicant is ready and
willing to cooperate with the investigation and will appear for voice
spectrography test as and when called for and for the said aspect,
the applicant has tendered a.idavit-cum-undertaking. Nothing is
Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/17006/2026 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2026
required to be recovered or discovered. He therefore submits that,
considering the nature of the o.ence, 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 o.ence and
considering the gravity of o.ence, no case is made out to entertain
present bail application. Further, voice spectrography test is yet to
be conducted and if the applicant is released on bail, possibility
cannot be ruled out that the applicant will 6ee from justice.
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 o.ence, 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
Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/17006/2026 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2026
respective parties and perused the investigation papers. Allegation
against the present applicant is that he has received illegal
grati cation of Rs.2,00,000/- on behalf of the government servant.
Following aspects have been considered:
(1) Investigation is over and charge-sheet is led;
(2) Applicant is behind the bar since 16/04/2026;
(3) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the
applicant;
(4) The applicant has led a.idavit-cum-undertaking dated
29/07/2026 that he is ready and willing to undergo the voice
spectrography test/voice sample examination, if so directed
by the competent court or authority. The same is on record.
(5) Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will
take its own time;
(6) Prosecution has failed to point out the circumstances to
continue or prolong his detention.
[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/17006/2026 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2026
[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 t 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.11194029260001 of 2026 registered with Vadodara
City ACB Police Station, Vadodara City, on executing a personal
bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty- ve 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
every month for a period of six months between 11.00 a.m.
and 2.00 p.m.;
(f) furnish the Aadhaar card, email ID/present address of
his residence to the Investigating O.icer 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
Page 4 of 5
R/CR.MA/17006/2026 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2026
trial Court shall issue warrant and cancel the bail of the
applicant.
(h) shall comply with the undertaking dated 29.07.2026
tendered before this Court failing which learned
trial Court shall have liberty to issue warrant
against the applicant.
[9.0] The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not
required in connection with any other o.ence 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 in6uenced 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 11/08/2026 16:46:48
Page 5 of 5
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.