[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Mukeshbhai Khodabhai Solanki (Mukesh @ ... vs State Of Gujarat on 13 March, 2026
Author: A.Y. Kogje
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/27836/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/03/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 27836 of 2025
==========================================================
MUKESHBHAI KHODABHAI SOLANKI (MUKESH @ KANO @ KULDIP
KHODABHAI SOLANKI)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS AMRUTA A BHARADWAJ(13399) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. UTKARSH SHARMA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
TARAK M SAVANT(8196) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
Date : 13/03/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. This application is filed by the applicant under Section 439 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for successive regular bail
in connection with FIR registered as C.R. No.I-184/2019 with
RAJKOT 'B' DIVISION POLICE STATION, RAJKOT, for the
offence punishable under Sections 302, 323, 504 and 120B of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act.
2. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits
that considering the nature of offence, the applicant may be
enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/27836/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/03/2026
undefined
3. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor
appearing for the respondent-State has opposed grant of regular
bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.
4. Learned Advocate Tarak M. Savant appearing for the respondent
No.2- original complainant has submitted that it is the case of
cross-complaint, where in the cross-complaint, the complainant
herein is an accused and he is enlarged on regular bail and has
no objection, if the bail is granted to the applicant.
5. Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties
do not press for a further reasoned order.
6. I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the
respective parties and perused the papers. Following aspects are
considered :-
I) The F.I.R. is registered on 15-11-2019 for the offence which
is alleged to have taken place on 15-11-2019;
II) The applicant is in custody since 27-11-2019;
III) Investigation is concluded and charge-sheet is filed;
IV) Present application is successive bail application in view
of the subsequent development, where according to learned
Advocate for the applicant, the complainant as well as eye-
witnesses have been declared hostile.
V) Learned Advocate for the applicant has taken this Court to
evidence of the brother of the deceased, who is examined as
PW No.5 also an eye-witness, has been declared hostile.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/27836/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/03/2026
undefined
Similarly, another eye-witness; PW No.6; Yunus Babubhai
Theba is also declared hostile.
VI) It appears that out of 54 witnesses cited in the charge-
sheet, 17 witnesses have been examined so far. However, eye-
witnesses have turned hostile.
VII) The Court has taken into consideration order passed by
this Court rejecting the bail application on merits on the basis
of the evidence of witnesses namely the complainant;
Aezazbhai, Jabirbhai, Yunusbhai and Farukbhai. However, all
of these witnesses referred to in the earlier order have been
declared hostile.
VIII) Learned Advocate for the applicant under the instruction
submitted that there are no other antecedents against the
applicant. Antecedent reported under Section 279 of IPC,
wherein reportedly the applicant is already bailed out.
IX) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor under the
instructions of the Investigating Officer is unable to bring on
record any special circumstances against the applicant.
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.
7. 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 detail,
prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to
exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/27836/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/03/2026
undefined
8. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is
ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with C.R.
No.I-184/2019 with RAJKOT 'B' DIVISION POLICE STATION,
RAJKOT on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/= (Rupees
Ten 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 & shall not obstruct or hamper the police
investigation and shall not to play mischief with the evidence
collected or yet to be collected by the police;
(c) surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a
week;
(d) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of
the Trial Court concerned;
(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 p.m.;
(f) furnish the present address of his residence to the
Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of
execution of the bond and shall not change the residence
without prior permission of Trial Court;
9. The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not
required in connection with any other offence for the time being.
If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/27836/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/03/2026
undefined
Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take
appropriate action in the matter.
10. 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.
11. At the trial, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the
observations of preliminary nature qua the evidence at this stage
made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.
12. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made
absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct Service is permitted.
(A.Y. KOGJE, J)
PARESH SOMPURA
