High Court of Gujarat
LALITSINGH NATHUSINGH @ NARAYANSINGH RAVAT (RAJPUT)versusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 44-PARTLY ALLOWED @ FH
Holding
The Court held that, on a prima facie basis, the applicant is entitled to regular bail and exercised its discretion to grant bail subject to conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, Lalitsinh Nathusinh @ Narayansingh Ravat (Rajput) and another, applied for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with FIR C.R. No.11209003260082 alleging offences under Sections 65(A)(E), 81 and 83 of the Prohibition Act. The applicant, a vehicle cleaner and permanent resident of Rajasthan, had no criminal antecedents and agreed not to leave Gujarat, offering to comply with any conditions. The State opposed bail, arguing the nature of the alleged offences and the applicant's role warranted denial. The Court, referring to the Supreme Court’s decision in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, examined the applicant's background and the prima facie nature of the case, and concluded that discretion could be exercised in favour of bail. Accordingly, the Court granted regular bail subject to a bond of Rs.25,000, a surety, and several conditions including residence restriction, passport surrender, and weekly police reporting.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted to the applicant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita for alleged offences under the Prohibition Act.
- Whether the nature of the alleged offences and the applicant's role preclude the exercise of judicial discretion in granting bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
regular bailSection 483Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha SanhitaProhibition Actbail conditionscriminal procedureGujarat High Court
Judgment
R/CR.MA/6545/2026 ORDER DATED: 18/03/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
CHARGESHEET) NO. 6545 of 2026
==========================================================
LALITSINGH NATHUSINGH @ NARAYANSINGH RAVAT (RAJPUT) & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
O I PATHAN(7684) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE UTKARSH THAKORBHAI
DESAI
Date : 18/03/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. O.I. Pathan appearing on
behalf of the applicant no. 1. Mr. Pathan, under instructions
submits that, he does not wish to press the present application
qua applicant no. 1, and seeks permission to withdraw the same
with a liberty to !le fresh application in accordance with law, qua
the applicant no. 1, after !ling of the chargesheet. Permission as
prayed for, is granted. This application is disposed of as
withdrawn with the above liberty qua the applicant no. 1. So far
as applicant no. 2 (hereinafter referred to as ‘applicant’) is
concerned, the following order is passed:
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. O.I. Pathan for the applicant
Page 1 of 6
R/CR.MA/6545/2026 ORDER DATED: 18/03/2026
and learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.
3. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of the
respondent-State.
4. The applicant has !led this application under Section 483 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the
applicant on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.
11209003260082 of 2026 registered with Kheroj Police Station,
Sabarkantha for the o:ence punishable under Sections 65(A)(E),
81, 83 of the Prohibition Act.
5. Learned advocate for the applicant would submit that,
considering the role attributed to the applicant, and nature of
the allegation levelled, the applicant may be enlarged on regular
bail. It is further submitted that, the applicant is ready and willing
to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this Court,
if released on bail. Learned advocate for the applicant has
submitted that, the applicant shall not leave the State of Gujarat
till the trial is over.
6. As against the same, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
appearing for the respondent – State has vehemently objected to
the grant of regular bail. Learned APP has submitted that looking
Page 2 of 6
R/CR.MA/6545/2026 ORDER DATED: 18/03/2026
to the nature of o:ence and the role attributed to the present
applicant, this Court may not exercise discretion in favour of the
applicant and the application may be dismissed.
7. I have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the
respective parties and perused the papers. Following aspects are
considered:-
i. The applicant though is a permanent resident of Rajasthan,
he shall not leave the State of Gujarat, hence would be
available at the time of trial;
ii. The applicant does not have any criminal antecedents.
iii. The applicant was a cleaner of the vehicle which was driven
by accused no. 1.
This Court has taken into consideration the law laid down
by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v.
Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012] 1 SCC 40.
8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering
the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the
First Information Report, without discussing the evidence in
Page 3 of 6
R/CR.MA/6545/2026 ORDER DATED: 18/03/2026
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.
9. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is
ordered to be released on bail in connection with F.I.R. registered
as C.R. No. 11209003260082 of 2026 registered with Kheroj
Police Station, Sabarkantha, on executing a bail bond of
Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five 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;
[c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a
week, and if she does not possess a passport, she shall !le an
aEdavit to that e:ect;
[d] not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of
the Sessions Court concerned;
[e] furnish the present address of his residence in Gujarat to
Page 4 of 6
R/CR.MA/6545/2026 ORDER DATED: 18/03/2026
the I.O. and the Court at the time of execution of the bond
along with documentary proof and shall not change his
residence without prior intimation to the I.O. and the court;
[f] mark presence on every Sunday before the concerned
police station, till the trial is over.
[g] not indulge in similar kind of o:ence hereinafter, for
which, he shall !le aEdavits before the concerned court and
the police station.
10. The Authorities will release the applicant only if she 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 Court concerned will be at liberty to take appropriate
action in accordance with law.
11. Bail bond to be executed before the trial 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.
12. At the stage of trial, the competent court shall not be
inFuenced by any observations of this Court which are of
preliminary nature, made at this stage only for the purpose of
Page 5 of 6
R/CR.MA/6545/2026 ORDER DATED: 18/03/2026
enlarging the applicant on regular bail.
13. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is
made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
permitted.
(UTKARSH THAKORBHAI DESAI, J)
ANIRUDH OJHA
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ANIRUDH OJHA(HC02370), ENGLISH STENO GRADE-II\, at High Court of Gujarat on 18/03/2026 18:10:28
Page 6 of 6
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