High Court of Gujarat
VIVEK PRAFULBHAI NARANBHAI CHAUHANversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- HASMUKH D SUTHAR
Holding
The Court held that, prima facie, the applicant is entitled to regular bail and granted it subject to conditions.
Summary
The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 after a charge‑sheet was filed for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita including forgery and assault. The State opposed bail, arguing the applicant played an active role and might tamper with evidence. The Court examined factors such as the nature of the accusation, the applicant’s limited alleged involvement, the completion of investigation, parity with co‑accused already on bail, and the presumption of innocence. Relying on Supreme Court precedents 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 to ensure the applicant’s appearance and prevent interference with the investigation.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted after the filing of a charge‑sheet under Section 483 BNSS for the offences alleged.
- Whether the applicant’s alleged participation and past antecedents justify denial of bail.
- Whether parity with co‑accused already released on bail warrants granting bail to the applicant.
- Whether the conditions imposed are sufficient to safeguard the trial and prevent tampering with evidence.
Legislation cited
Subjects
regular bailpre‑trial detentionpresumption of innocenceBNSSBNYSforgerycriminal procedurepersonal libertyArticle 21
Judgment
R/CR.MA/18879/2026 ORDER DATED: 14/08/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 18879 of 2026
==========================================================
VIVEK PRAFULBHAI NARANBHAI CHAUHAN
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. KISHAN H DAIYA(6929) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR KANVA ANTANI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 14/08/2026
ORDER
1) RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the
respondent-State.
2) 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.11210012260243 of 2026 registered with Chowk
Bazaar Police Station, Surat for the o.ences under
Sections 318(2), 319(2), 336(2), 336(3), 204, 337 and 338 of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3) Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant
submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely
implicated in the o.ence and now nothing is required to be
recovered or discovered. Investigation is over and charge-
sheet has been led. He therefore submits that, considering
the nature of the o.ence, the applicant may be enlarged on
regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/18879/2026 ORDER DATED: 14/08/2026
4) 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 involved in the present o.ence and played an
active role. There is every possibility that, if the applicant is
released on bail, he will indulge in similar o.ences and try to
tamper with the evidence. Therefore, present application
does not deserve consideration.
5) 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) 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 the applicant has prepared
Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/18879/2026 ORDER DATED: 14/08/2026
forged appointment letter in his mobile to o.er
job in railway and subsequently forwarded to co-
accused and then to the complainant. Except
preparing forged job order in mobile, no role is
attributed to the applicant. The mobile is already
seized and sent to the FSL.;
(2) Applicant is behind the bars since 20.02.2026;
(3) The applicant is having two past antecedents,
however, the accused is governed by presumption
of innocence unless and until proved guilty;
(4) Co-accused having similar 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;
(5) Investigation is over and charge-sheet is led;
(6) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered
from the applicant;
(7) Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial
will take some time.
7) 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
Page 3 of 5
R/CR.MA/18879/2026 ORDER DATED: 14/08/2026
exception” as well as the concept of personal liberty
guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India,
present application deserves consideration.
8) 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.11210012260243 of 2026 registered
with Chowk Bazaar Police Station, Surat 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;
(a) shall not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse
liberty;
(b) shall 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) shall surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court
within a week;
(d) shall not leave the territory of the State of Gujarat
without prior permission of the Trial Court
concerned;
(e) shall mark presence before the concerned Police
Station once in every month for a period of six
Page 4 of 5
R/CR.MA/18879/2026 ORDER DATED: 14/08/2026
months between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;
(f) shall furnish the 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 without prior permission of Trial
Court;
(g) shall not indulge in any illegal activity, failing which
the learned trial Court shall issue warrant and cancel
the bail of the applicant.
9) 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) 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) At the trial, the trial Court shall not be inEuenced by the
observations of preliminary nature qua the evidence at this
stage made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on
bail.
12) 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 14/08/2026 15:49:57
Page 5 of 5
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