Gujarat High Court
Mehulbhai @ Kano Tulsibhai Makwana vs State Of Gujarat on 24 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17126/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 17126 of 2025
==========================================================
MEHULBHAI @ KANO TULSIBHAI MAKWANA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. KULDEEP D VAIDYA(7045) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
PARAS K SUKHWANI(8284) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR DHAWAN JAYSWAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 24/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The applicant has filed this application under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the applicant on
regular bail in connection with FIR being CR. No.11198006250793 of 2025
registered with Ghogha Road Police Station, Bhavnagar.
2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the
Respondent - State, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent-
complainant waives service of notice.
3. Learned Advocate appearing for the applicant has submitted that the
applicant has good reputation in the society and no useful purpose would be
served by keeping the applicant in Jail for indefinite period. It is further
contended that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions
that may be imposed by this Court if released on bail.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17126/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/09/2025
undefined
4. Per contra, learned APP has opposed the present application contending
that the prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS,
2023 has categorically stated that the applicant had established physical
relations with her without her consent. The age of the prosecutrix was 15 years
at the relevant time. Learned APP has, therefore, submitted that looking to the
nature of offence, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the
applicant and the application may be dismissed.
5. Learned Advocate Mr. Paras K Sukhwani appearing for the original
complainant has also opposed the application citing the age of the prosecutrix.
He also seeks permission to rely upon the following judgments in support of
his submission :-
i) In case of Satish Kumar Jayanti Lal Dagbar vs State of
Gujarat reported in (2015) 7 SCC 359;
ii) In case of Anversinh @ Kiransinh Fateshsinh Vaghlea vs
State of Gujarat reported in (2021) 3 SCC 12;
iii) In case of Nihar Ranjitbhai Barad vs State of Gujarat reported
passed in R/Cr.MA No.18985 of 2022;
iv) In case of Jagbir vs State (N C. T. Delhi) passed in Bail
Application No.111/2022;
v) In case of Sonu Gupta @ Sonu Kumar Gupta vs State of U.P.
And Another passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.10027 of
2023;
vi) In case of Moti Lal Songara vs Prem Prakash @ Pappu &
Anr. reported in (2013) 9 SCC 199 and
vii) In case of Bhasker Laxman Jadhav & Ors. Vs. Karamveer
Kakasahed Wagh Education Society & Ors. reported in (2013)
11 SCC 531.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17126/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/09/2025
undefined
6. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the record. In the
present offence, the investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed.
Though the prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS,
2023 has stated that the applicant had physical relations with her without her
consent, in the history given by her before the doctor, she has categorically
stated that the physical relations were established between herself and the
present applicant with her consent on several occasions. Having regard to these
aspects, the present application deserves consideration, hence the present
application is hereby allowed. This Court has also considered the following
aspects:
(a) As per catena of decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court, there are mainly
3 factors which are required to be considered by this court i.e. prima-
facie case, availability of Applicant accused at the time of trial and
tampering and hampering with the witnesses by the accused.
(b) That the learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the
Applicant Accused is not likely to flee away.
(c) That the Applicant is in custody since 30.04.2025.
(d) The law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay
Chandra v. C.B.I. reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40.
7. Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties and perusing the
record produced in this case as well as taking into consideration the facts of the
case, nature of allegations, gravity of accusation, availability of the applicant
accused at the time of Trial etc. and the role attributed to the present applicant
accused, the present application deserves to be allowed and accordingly stands
allowed. This Court has also gone through the FIR and police papers and also
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17126/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/09/2025
undefined
the earlier order passed by the learned Sessions Court where the learned
Sessions Judge has disallowed the bail Application at initial stage. The
applicant accused is ordered to be released on bail in connection with the
aforesaid FIR on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of
the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, subject to the following
conditions that he shall:
(a) not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any
person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from
disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer or tamper with
the evidence;
(b) maintain law and order and not to indulge in any criminal activities;
(c) furnish the documentary proof of complete, correct and present address
of residence to the Investigating Officer and to the Trial Court at the
time of executing the bond and shall not change the residence without
prior permission of the trial Court;
(d) provide contact numbers as well as the contact numbers of the sureties
before the Trial Court. In case of change in such numbers inform in
writing immediately to the trial Court;
(e) mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in a month for a
period of six months between 11:00 a.m. and 2.00 pm;
(f) file an affidavit stating his immovable properties whether self acquired
or ancestral with description, location and present value of such
properties before the Trial Court, if any;
(g) not leave India without prior permission of the Trial Court;
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17126/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/09/2025
undefined
(h) surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a week. If the
applicant does not possess passport, shall file an Affidavit to that effect.
8. Bail bond to be executed before the Trial Court having jurisdiction to try
the case. It would be open for the Trial Court concerned to give time to furnish
the solvency certificate if prayed for.
9. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Trial Court
concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action according to
law. The Authorities will release the Applicant forthwith only if the Applicant
is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being.
10. At the trial, the concerned trial Court shall not be influenced by the
prima-facie observations made by this Court in the present order.
11. Rule is made absolute. Direct service permitted.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J)
RAVI OZA
