Gujarat High Court
Sayar @Sahil Kurji @Raghavbhai ... vs State Of Gujarat on 6 May, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10695/2026 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 10695 of 2026
==========================================================
SAYAR @SAHIL KURJI @RAGHAVBHAI JAKHANIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR S S PARIKH(11335) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ROHAN RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 06/05/2026
ORDER
1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.
2. The present successive bail application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNSS") for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11208003240623 of 2024 registered with Gandhugram 2 (University) Police Station, for the offence under Sections 302, 325, 324, 143, 147, 148, 149, 452 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence without any direct or indirect involvement. It is further submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 24.06.2024 and has no past antecedents. Considering the role attributed to the applicant and the nature of the allegations levelled, it is urged that the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail. It is further submitted that the investigation is over and the charge-sheet has already been filed; therefore, no useful Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Thu May 07 2026 Downloaded on : Thu May 07 21:46:53 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10695/2026 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2026 undefined purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in jail for an indefinite period. It is also contended that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court while granting bail.
4. The learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent- State has strongly opposed the present application, submitting that the applicant is the kingpin and main conspirator in the alleged offence. It is further submitted that applications preferred by similarly situated co-accused have been withdrawn, considering that the trial is already in progress. The learned APP has pointed out that the trial has commenced, 4 to 5 witnesses have already been examined, and approximately 40 to 41 witnesses still remain to be examined. In view of the serious role attributed to the applicant and the stage of the trial, it is urged that the present application be rejected.
5. While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the accused in the alleged offence, 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 Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Thu May 07 2026 Downloaded on : Thu May 07 21:46:53 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10695/2026 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2026 undefined peculiar to the accused; (v) larger interest of the public or the State and similar other considerations are required to be considered.
6. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and having considered the material on record, it emerges that the present applicant is facing charges under Sections 302, 323, 325, 451, 147, 148, 149 and 120B of the IPC. From the investigation papers, it prima facie appears that the applicant was a member of an unlawful assembly and, in furtherance of the common object, along with co-accused, had assaulted the deceased, as a result of which the deceased succumbed to the injuries. The material on record indicates that the present applicant had actively participated in the incident and is attributed with the role of assaulting the deceased with a wooden object. It is true that one of the lady accused has been released on bail; however, the case of the present applicant stands on a different footing considering the specific role attributed to him. It is also noted that a similarly situated co-accused has withdrawn his application before this Court.
7. Considering the gravity and seriousness of the offence, as well as the severity of the punishment prescribed, mere filing of the charge-sheet would not entitle the applicant to be released on bail. At this stage, the prima facie material indicates active involvement of the applicant in the commission of the offence. Further, while considering a bail application in cases involving unlawful assembly, particularly in light of Section 149 of the IPC, it is not necessary at this stage to meticulously segregate or Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Thu May 07 2026 Downloaded on : Thu May 07 21:46:53 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10695/2026 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2026 undefined identify the individual role of each accused or to accept the contention that the applicant did not actively participate in the assault.
8. This Court deems it appropriate to refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Shobha Namdev Sonavane v. Samadhan Bajirao Sonvane, (2026 INSC 181), wherein it has been held that, in cases of unlawful assembly (Sections 143 to 149 of the Indian Penal Code) resulting in serious offences such as murder, specific individual roles need not be assigned at the stage of bail. The Court set aside the High Court's order granting bail, emphasizing that all members of the unlawful assembly are jointly liable for acts committed in furtherance of the common object. Therefore, in view of the role attributed to the applicant, grant of bail is not permissible at this stage, and the prosecution is not required to establish the specific injury or individual role of each member of the unlawful assembly at this stage.
9. So far as the arguments advanced by the learned advocate for the applicant that the applicant be released as the charge sheet has been filed is concerned, another important aspect that needs to be considered is that the mere filing of a charge sheet is not a sufficient ground to enlarge the accused on bail, as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Virupakshappa Gouda and Another vs. The State of Karnataka, reported in (2017) 5 SCC 406. If the applicant is released, the possibility of tampering with evidence cannot be ruled out, especially since the co-accused are absconding, and the volatile nature of the Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Thu May 07 2026 Downloaded on : Thu May 07 21:46:53 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10695/2026 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2026 undefined data could affect the integrity of the evidence.
10. This Court has deemed it appropriate to refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ram Govind Upadhyay vs. Sudarshan Singh, (2002) 3 SCC 598.
11. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is of view that it is not a fit case to exercise discretion and allow the application under Section 483 of the BNSS in favour of the applicant. Accordingly, present application does not deserve any consideration and is hereby dismissed. All reasons are tentative in nature. Rule is discharged.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) ALI Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Thu May 07 2026 Downloaded on : Thu May 07 21:46:53 IST 2026