GULABSINH JINKUBHA SARVAIYA/KHSTRIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

 R/CR.MA/19460/2026(GJHC240631932026)                  ORDER DATED: 20/08/2026




IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
   R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
               CHARGESHEET) NO. 19460 of 2026
==========================================================
            GULABSINH JINKUBHA SARVAIYA/KHSTRIYA
                             Versus
                      STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SHAKTISINH GOHIL(2460) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ROHAN SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                                  Date : 20/08/2026
                                       ORDER

[1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-
State.

[2.0] The present application is 7led under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in
connection with FIR being C.R. No.11198014260199 of 2026 registered
with Datha Police Station, Disrtrict Bhavnagar for the o@ences
punishable under Sections 103(1), 109(1), 117(2), 118(1), 115(2), 352,
351(3), 54, 324(2), 61(2) and 238 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 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. 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
vehemently opposed the present application on the ground that present



                                        Page 1 of 6
 R/CR.MA/19460/2026(GJHC240631932026)                  ORDER DATED: 20/08/2026




application is before 7ling of the charge-sheet and investigation is still
going on. He has further argued that one person has lost his life and
applicant herein is charged with o@ence under Section 103(1) of the BNS
read with section 54 of the BNS i.e. criminal conspiracy and even though
the applicant was not present at the scene of o@ence but he is the
kingpin and mastermind of the entire o@ence and even, the deceased in
his dying declaration has speci7cally named the present applicant.
Therefore, considering the seriousness of the o@ence, he has requested
to dismiss the present application.

[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)      The complaint in the present case is 7led by the complainant who
         is now deceased. The case of the complainant is in two parts. In
         7rst part, it is alleged that on 24.06.2026, present applicant and



                                        Page 2 of 6
 R/CR.MA/19460/2026(GJHC240631932026)                   ORDER DATED: 20/08/2026




         other co-accused persons went to the village of the complainant
         for erecting electric poles which was opposed by the complainant
         pursuant to which the accused persons threatened the deceased
         complainant with dire consequences. In the second part, on
         27.06.2026 at around 4 p.m. co-accused Gigabhai Bhammar,
         Dhanabhai Kamaliya, Rambhai Bhammbar and Rambhai Kang
         (Gadhvi) again went to the village of deceased complainant for
         erecting electric poles in the river of village and while they were
         digging, the deceased complainant again approached them to
         obstruct them from doing so and thereafter, allegedly under the
         instructions of the present applicant and co-accused Rambhai, co-
         accused Gigabhai, Dhanabhai, Rambhai Bhammar and Rambhai
         Kang inKicted blows to the deceased complainant with iron pipe,
         wooden log and stones and caused injuries to the complainant
         however, the applicant was not present at the spot on the fateful
         day of the incident. The complainant having sustained injuries
         was admitted in the hospital and during the treatment, the
         complainant died on 07.07.2026 i.e. after 10 days of the incident;

(2)      It has come on record that the complainant has given the
         complaint while he was under treatment and expired after 10
         days of the incident and even, as per the case of the deceased /
         complainant in the complaint, the applicant was not present at
         the scene of o@ence and it is only alleged that under the
         instructions of the present applicant, the entire incident has
         taken place however, there is neither any overt act attributed nor
         any injury caused by the present applicant to the deceased and
         even admittedly the applicant was not present at the time of
         o@ence.

(3)      So far as dying declaration is concerned, it is submitted by the



                                        Page 3 of 6
 R/CR.MA/19460/2026(GJHC240631932026)                     ORDER DATED: 20/08/2026




         learned APP that deceased has speci7cally named the present
         applicant however, perusing the dying declaration it is mentioned
         that, “persons of contractor K.P. Energy viz. Rambhai and
         Gulabsinh” but even if we accept the allegations in the dying
         declaration as it is, it clearly transpires from the naked eye that
         said phrase is inserted subsequently;

(4)      Further, there is no motive or enmity coming forth from the
         record of the case and so far as allegation of alleged conspiracy is
         concerned, no material on record which indicates that to cause
         the death of deceased, conspiracy was hatched;

(5)      Substantial part of investigation is over / Investigation is over and
         charge-sheet is 7led;

(6)      Applicant is behind the bars since 27.06.2026;

(7)      There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the
         applicant;

(8)      The applicant is not having any past antecedent;

(9)      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


                                        Page 4 of 6
 R/CR.MA/19460/2026(GJHC240631932026)                    ORDER DATED: 20/08/2026




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 7t 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.11198014260199 of 2026 registered with Datha Police Station,
Disrtrict Bhavnagar on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/-
(Rupees Twenty-7ve 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 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 @ling of the charge-sheet and after @ling of the
            charge-sheet, 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 OOcer 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;



                                        Page 5 of 6
 R/CR.MA/19460/2026(GJHC240631932026)                                                ORDER DATED: 20/08/2026




       (g)    not to indulge in any illegal activity failing which learned trial
              Court shall issue warrant and cancel the bail of the applicant.

       (h)    not to enter District Bhavnagar till @ling of the charge-
              sheet except for marking presence before the concerned
              police station and/or for attending the court proceedings.


[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 inKuenced 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 20/08/2026 17:13:43




                                                  Page 6 of 6