JAYSUKH ARJANBHAI BY CASTE JIVANI (PATEL)versusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- HASMUKH D SUTHAR
Holding
The Court held that the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Summary
The High Court of Gujarat considered an application for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed by Jaysukh Arjanbhai, who was charged under Sections 61, 316(2), 318(2), 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act for allegedly procuring a current account and receiving commission. The applicant claimed innocence and argued that no further recovery was required, while the State opposed bail citing the seriousness of the offences. The Court examined standard bail factors, noted that none of the offences attracted life or death penalty and are triable by a magistrate, and referenced Supreme Court precedents (Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor). Finding no substantial risk of tampering, flight, or threat to public interest, the Court exercised its discretion and granted regular bail with a personal bond and several conditions. The order directed the applicant’s release subject to compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted under Section 483 BNSS for the offences alleged under BNS and the IT Act.
- Whether the nature and severity of the alleged offences justify denial of bail.
- Whether there is a reasonable risk of witness tampering, flight, or obstruction of investigation.
- Whether imposing conditions on bail is appropriate in the circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023s. 483
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023s. 316(2), s. 318(2), s. 318(4), s. 61
- Information Technology Act, 2000s. 66(D)
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.MA/18826/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 18826 of 2026
==========================================================
JAYSUKH ARJANBHAI BY CASTE JIVANI (PATEL)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RAFIK LOKHANDWALA(5590) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR SHREY H DAVE(8444) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR KRUTIK PARIKH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 17/08/2026
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.11191067240189 of 2024 registered with
Cyber Crime Police Station, Ahmedabad City for the oBences punishable
under Sections 61, 316(2), 318(2) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 (for short “BNS”) and section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act.
[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the oBence and now
nothing is required to be recovered or discovered. He therefore submits
that, considering the nature of the oBence, 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 looking to the nature and gravity of the oBence.
Page 1 of 4
R/CR.MA/18826/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026
[5.0] While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the
accused in the alleged oBence, 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 applicant is not named in the FIR however, during the
investigation, his name surfaced and it is alleged that present
applicant procured one current account from one Sanjay
Ghanshyambhai Mehta in the name of Murlidhar Developers under
the pretext of depositing money of real estate transactions and
further handed over the password and kit of the said account to one
Umeshbhai Rameshbhai Khumar and for the said act, applicant
received 2% i.e. Rs.20,000/- towards commission and except acting
as a middleman, applicant has not played any role and even
otherwise, investigation is over and charge-sheet is :led;
(2) None of the oBence alleged is punishable with life sentence or
death penalty and is triable by the Court of Magistrate;
(3) Applicant is behind the bars since 02.05.2026;
Page 2 of 4
R/CR.MA/18826/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026
(4) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant;
(5) The applicant is having one antecedent, which is registered after
the registration of present oBence however, he is presumed to
be innocent till proven guilty;
(6) 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
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.11191067240189 of 2024 registered with Cyber Crime Police Station,
Ahmedabad 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 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
Page 3 of 4
R/CR.MA/18826/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026
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
month for a period of six months between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00
p.m.;
(f) furnish the copy of Aadhaar card, email ID/contact number /
permanent and present address of his residence to the
Investigating ONcer 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 applicant.
[9.0] The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in
connection with any other oBence 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 inOuenced 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.)
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 17/08/2026 15:08:08
Page 4 of 4
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.