[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Iqbalbhai Amirbhai Madhara vs State Of Gujarat on 23 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/4009/2026 ORDER DATED: 23/02/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 4009 of 2026
==========================================================
IQBALBHAI AMIRBHAI MADHARA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SAHEEL S KADRI(11239) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR H K PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 23/02/2026
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 C.R. No. 11198065230294 of 2023 registered with
Vallbhipur Police Station, Bhavnagar for the offences
punishable under Section 15, 15(C), 29 of the NDPS Act.
2. Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant and learned
APP for the Respondent - State.
3. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted
that the applicant has been arrested in connection with the
present offence on 19.07.2023 and has undergone incarceration
for a period of more than two years and six months till now
there is no progress in the trial. He further submitted that the
allegations levelled against the applicant in the present offence
is to the effect that he had called for the stock of contraband
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/4009/2026 ORDER DATED: 23/02/2026
undefined
substance, which has been seized in the present case. The
applicant was not found in conscious possession of any such
substance. So far as the aspect of antecedent is concerned, the
applicant has been ordered to be enlarged on bail in the other
offence registered against him. He therefore submitted to allow
the present application and enlarge the applicant on bail
subject to suitable conditions. Learned Advocate for the
Applicant has also 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.
4. Per contra, learned APP has opposed the present
application for grant of regular bail contending that the
applicant had called for the contraband substance involved in
the present offence, and there is sufficient material on record
indicating the same. He further submitted that, mere delay in
trial did not allow the present applicant to claim the benefit of
bail. In view of the recent judgement of the Apex Court in
case of Union of India Vs. Vigin K Varghese, delay in trial
cannot be the ground of bail. The present application is the
successive application filed by the applicant after the
withdrawal of the earlier two applications filed by the
applicant. Learned advocate for the applicant is not in a
position to show any change in circumstances after withdrawal
of earlier two applications filed by the applicant. Learned APP
has therefore submitted that looking to the nature of offence,
this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/4009/2026 ORDER DATED: 23/02/2026
undefined
applicant and the Application may be dismissed.
5. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the
record. The contraband substance involved in the present
offence is the Poppy Straw weighing 386 Kilograms. As per the
case of prosecution, it was the present applicant who had
called for the said stock of contraband substance. Apart from
the statement of the co-accused, there is other material
available on record to indicate that it was the present
applicant who had called for the said stock of contraband
substance. So far as the aspect of delay in trial is concerned,
in view of the recent judgment of the Apex Court in the case
of Vigin K Varghese, the delay in trial does not entitle the
present applicant to be enlarged on bail.
6. Having regard to these aspects, no case is made out. The
application stands dismissed.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J)
SAKSHI MAURYA
