High Court of Gujarat
ANURAG MAHIPAL YADAVversusSTATE 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 under Section 483 of the BNSS.
Summary
The applicant, Anurag Mahipal Yadav, sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with an FIR alleging transport of contraband liquor under the Gujarat Prohibition Act. He claimed innocence, no prior record, and ownership of the vehicle used, while the State opposed bail alleging involvement. The court examined standard bail factors, noting the applicant’s clean record, the substantial progress of investigation, the co‑accused already on bail, and the principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception. Relying on precedents such as Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor, the court concluded that pre‑trial detention would amount to a de facto conviction. Consequently, the court granted regular bail on a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with a surety and imposed conditions to prevent tampering, ensure appearance, and restrict travel.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted under Section 483 of the BNSS before the filing of a chargesheet in a case under the Gujarat Prohibition Act.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of antecedents, ownership of the vehicle, and the bail of a co‑accused justify granting bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed are sufficient to safeguard the investigation and prevent the accused from absconding.
Legislation cited
Subjects
regular bailSection 483 BNSSGujarat Prohibition Actcontraband liquorpre‑trial detentionpersonal libertyArticle 21
Judgment
R/CR.MA/19127/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
CHARGESHEET) NO. 19127 of 2026
==========================================================
ANURAG MAHIPAL YADAV
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. IRAFAN H SAIYED(18593) 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. 11209041250505 of 2025 registered
with Prantij Police Station, Sabarkantha, for the o.ence under the
provisions of The Gujarat Prohibition 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.
Substantial part of investigation is over. The applicant is owner of the
vehicle and has no past antecedent. 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
involved in the o.ence. Considering the conduct of the applicant,
application does not deserve any consideration.
[5.0] While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the
Page 1 of 4
R/CR.MA/19127/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026
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) The applicant is owner of the vehicle in which contraband liquor is
transported.
(2) No past antecedent;
(3) Applicant is behind the bar since 17.07.2026;
(4) Substantial part of investigation is over;
(5) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant;
(6) There is no possibility to conclude the trial in near future.
(7) O.ence is triable by the Court of Magistrate.
(8) Co-accused 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.
[7.0] This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the
Page 2 of 4
R/CR.MA/19127/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026
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 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.
11209041250505 of 2025 registered with Prantij Police Station,
Sabarkantha on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-
ve Thousand only) with one local 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 territory of India without prior permission of the
Trial Court concerned;
(e) mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in a week
till ling of the chargesheet and after ling of the chargesheet,
Page 3 of 4
R/CR.MA/19127/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026
mark presence before the concerned police station once in a
month for a period of six months;
(f) furnish the copy of Aadhaar card, email ID/contact number /
permanent and present address of his residence to the
Investigating ODcer 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 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 17/08/2026 14:39:03
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