[Cites 15, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Narpatsinh Rupaji Rajput (Rajput) vs State Of Gujarat on 21 April, 2026
Author: Nikhil S. Kariel
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/841/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO.
841 of 2026
==========================================================
NARPATSINH RUPAJI RAJPUT (RAJPUT)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
RAFIK LOKHANDWALA(5590) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
HARDIK MEHTA, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 21/04/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Aditya Pancholi for learned
advocate Mr.Rafik Lokhandwala appearing on behalf of the
appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.Hardik
Mehta appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.
2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of
the respondent-State.
3. The present appeal is filed by appellant under Section
14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act read with Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for regular
bail in connection with F.I.R. bearing C.R. No. I-99/2019
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/841/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
registered with Dhanera Police Station, Banaskantha for the
offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 364(A),
365, 323, 324, 294(B), 506(2), 120(B) of the IPC and Sections
3(1)(R)(S), 3(2)(5-A) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
3.1. The present appellant having been arraigned as an
accused in connection with the aforementioned offence and
having been arrested for the said offence, and had been
released by learned Special Judge, Special Atrocity Court,
Deesa vide order dated 03.07.2020. The appellant not
remaining present during the trial, learned Sessions Court
having issued non-bailable warrant and the present appellant
moved the learned Sessions Court recalling of the warrant
and the learned Sessions Court having not considered the
same, had directed the appellant to be taken in custody vide
order dated 13.01.2026 and whereas, the present appellant
had moved an application for regular bail thereafter and vide
order dated 27.02.2026 the said application being rejected,
the appellant has approached this Court by way of the present
appeal.
4. Learned advocate for the appellant would submit that
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/841/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
considering the role attributed to the appellant, and nature of
the allegation levelled, the appellant may be enlarged on
regular bail. It is further submitted that since the charge-
sheet is filed no useful purpose would be served by keeping
the appellant in jail for indefinite period. It is further
contended that the appellant is ready and willing to abide by
all the conditions that may be imposed by this Court if
released on bail.
5. As against the same, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - State and learned
advocate for the complainant have vehemently objected to the
grant of regular bail. Learned APP has submitted that looking
to the nature of offence and the role attributed to the present
appellant, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour
of the appellant and the appeal may be dismissed.
6. This Court has heard learned Advocates appearing on
behalf of the respective parties and perused the papers.
Following aspects are considered:-
i. The fact of the present appellant having been released
in the substantive offence more particularly on a default bail.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/841/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
ii. The fact of the present appellant having appeared before
the learned Special Court till January-February, 2025 i.e. for
approximately four and a half years after the charge-sheet
had been filed.
iii. The fact of the appellant having been arrested on
13.01.2026 and being in custody for almost three months
after being arrested on the ground of non-bailable warrant.
7. 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 allegations made in the FIR and
without discussing the evidence in details as well as without
going into details, prima-facie, this Court is of the opinion that
this is a fit case to exercise the discretion to enlarge the
appellant on bail.
9. Hence, the appeal is allowed and the appellant is
ordered to be released on bail in connection with FIR being
C.R. No. I-99/2019 registered with Dhanera Police Station,
Banaskantha on executing a bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/841/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
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 injuries to the interest of the
prosecution;
[c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court
within a week;
[d] not leave the State of Gujarat without prior
permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;
[e] furnish the present address of residence to the I.O.
and also to the Court at the time of execution of the
bond and shall not change the residence without
prior intimation to the Investigating Officer
concerned ;
[f] mark presence once a fortnight for a period of six
months and thereafter, once a month till the trial
gets over, before the concerned police station.
10. The Authorities will release the appellants only if he is
not required in connection with any other offence for the time
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/841/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed,
the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to take appropriate
action in the matter.
11. 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.
12. At the stage of trial, the trial court shall not be
influenced by any observations of this Court which are of
preliminary nature made at this stage, only for the purpose of
considering the appeal of the appellant for being released on
regular bail.
13. The appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is
made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
permitted.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
Bhoomi
