Created byFuzzy Cloud

High Court of Gujarat

RUPSIBHAI JIVABHAI PARGIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

Disposal
38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

Holding

The Court held that the applicants are entitled to regular bail as the case prima facie warrants it, subject to conditions.

Summary

The petitioners, Rupsibhai Jivabhai Pargi and an associate, were arrested in a land‑dispute assault case where one allegedly used an axe and the other a stick, under sections 109(1), 352, 351(3) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act. They filed an application for regular bail under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 before the chargesheet was filed, claiming innocence and no risk of tampering with evidence. The State opposed bail, citing the gravity of the offences, but the Court considered factors such as the applicants’ advanced age (71 years), clean antecedent, the injured party’s discharge, and the lack of material to be recovered. Relying on 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 and that bail is the rule, not the exception. Consequently, the Court granted regular bail to each applicant on a personal bond of Rs 25,000 with a surety, subject to detailed conditions, and directed the lower court to execute the bail bond.

Issues considered

  • Whether regular bail can be granted under Section 483 BNSS before the filing of a chargesheet for offences under the BNS and Gujarat Police Act.
  • Whether the nature of the alleged offences, the applicants’ personal circumstances and the risk of witness tampering justify the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

regular bailpre‑trial detentionland disputeassaultBNSSBNSGujarat Police Actbail jurisprudenceArticle 21court conditions

Judgment

    R/CR.MA/17264/2026                                 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026




 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
   R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
               CHARGESHEET) NO. 17264 of 2026
==========================================================
               RUPSIBHAI JIVABHAI PARGI & ANR.
                              Versus
                       STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MAULIK M SONI(7249) for the applicants(s) No. 1,2
MR HIMANSHU PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                             Date : 27/07/2026
                                  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.11188007260432 of 2026 registered with
Meghraj Police Station, District Aravalli for the offences punishable under
Sections 109(1), 352, 351(3) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for
short “BNS”) and section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act.

[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants submits that
applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the offence and
now nothing is required to be recovered or discovered. He therefore
submits that, considering the nature of the offence, the applicants 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 looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.

[5.0] While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the


                                   Page 1 of 4
      R/CR.MA/17264/2026                                 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026




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)       The allegation is that with regard to land dispute the alleged
          incident took place wherein the applicant No.1 made an assault on
          the injured with axe and applicant No.2 with stick however, now the
          injured is out of danger and discharged from the hospital and even
          otherwise, substantial part of investigation is over;

(2)       Applicant No.1 is aged 71 years and applicants are behind the bars
          since 24.06.2026;

(3)       There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicants;

(4)       The applicants are not having any past antecedent;

(5)       Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will take some
          time;

[7.0] This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the



                                     Page 2 of 4
    R/CR.MA/17264/2026                                    ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026




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 applicants 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 applicants on regular bail.
Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicants are ordered to be
released       on   regular   bail   in   connection    with   FIR    being         C.R.
No.11188007260432 of 2026 registered with Meghraj Police Station,
District Aravalli on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees
Twenty-five Thousand only) each with ONE SURETY of the like amount to
the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that they
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 territory of 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;



                                      Page 3 of 4
    R/CR.MA/17264/2026                                                           ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026




     (f)       furnish the copy of Aadhaar card, email ID/contact number /
               permanent and present address of their residence to the
               Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of
               execution of the bond and shall not change the residence and
               contact number/SIM card 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 applicants.

[9.0] The authorities will release the applicants only if they are 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 applicants on bail.

[12.0]            Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
permitted.



                                                                      (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)
Ajay
 Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
 Digitally signed by: AJAY CHANDRAN MENON(HC00939), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 27/07/2026 14:51:07




                                                   Page 4 of 4


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

For a digitally signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's own website. Only the court can issue one.