High Court of Gujarat
JAYDEEP VINUBHAI SHAMBHUBHAI PAKHVADIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- HASMUKH D SUTHAR
Holding
The Court held that, given the completed investigation, lack of incriminating material against the applicant, his clean record, and the parity with a co‑accused already on bail, the applicant is entitled to regular bail.
Summary
The applicant, a vehicle cleaner, sought regular bail after a chargesheet was filed under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)C and 29 of the NDPS Act, invoking Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The State opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of the narcotics offence and risk of re‑offending. The Court examined factors such as the nature of the accusation, the fact that the investigation was complete, the applicant’s clean record, and the parity principle since a co‑accused driver had already 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 no substantive reason to deny bail. Consequently, the Court granted regular bail on a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with a surety and imposed standard conditions, emphasizing that any breach could lead to cancellation.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted after a chargesheet in an NDPS case under the BNSS, 2023.
- Whether the principle of parity with a co‑accused already on bail warrants granting bail to the applicant.
- Whether the seriousness of the alleged narcotics offence outweighs the presumption in favour of bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed are sufficient to safeguard the trial process.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023s. 483
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Acts. 20(b)(ii)C, s. 29, s. 8(c)
Subjects
regular bailpost‑chargesheet bailNDPS ActBNSS 2023personal libertyArticle 21parity principlepre‑trial detention
Judgment
R/CR.MA/18363/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/08/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 18363 of 2026
==========================================================
JAYDEEP VINUBHAI SHAMBHUBHAI PAKHVADIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. KISHAN H DAIYA(6929) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS VRUNDA SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 07/08/2026
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. 11995001250007 of 2025 registered
with State Monitoring Cell Police Station, Gandhinagar, for the o.ence
under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)C and 29 of NDPS Act.
[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the o.ence.
Investigation is over and chargesheet has been led. Allegation against the
applicant is that, he is cleaner of the vehicle. It is submitted that, nothing is
recovered from the conscious possession of the applicant. Driver of the
vehicle is released on bail by this Court and therefore, on the ground of
parity, bail is required to be granted. 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 submitted that, the applicant is facing
serious charges and involved in tra6cking of narcotic drugs. Therefore, it is
very much establishes that the applicant is involved in the o.ence and if he
Page 1 of 4
R/CR.MA/18363/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/08/2026
is granted bail, possibility cannot be ruled out to indulge himself in such
type of o.ence again. Considering the gravity of o.ence, application does
not deserve any 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
respective parties and perused the investigation papers. Following aspects
have been considered:
(1) Investigation is over and chargesheet has been led;
(2) Applicant is behind the bar since 19.04.2025;
(3) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant;
(4) There is no possibility to conclude the trial in near future.
(5) Having no past antecedent.
(6) Co-accused who is driver, 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 as the applicant is cleaner of the
vehicle.
Page 2 of 4
R/CR.MA/18363/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/08/2026
[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
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.
11995001250007 of 2025 registered with State Monitoring Cell Police
Station, Gandhinagar, on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees
twenty ve thousand) with one local 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 to leave India till trial is over, without prior permission of the
Trial Court concerned;
(e) mark presence before the concerned police station once in a
month for a period of six months;
(f) furnish the Aadhar card, email ID/present address of his
Page 3 of 4
R/CR.MA/18363/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/08/2026
residence to the Investigating O6cer and also to the Court at
the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the
residence/contact number, SIM number without prior permission
of Trial Court;
(g) if the applicant is found to be indulged in any illegal activities in
future, the trial Court concerned will be free to issue warrant and
cancel the bail granted to 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 inGuenced 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 07/08/2026 14:26:10
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