[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Jitendra @ Jagdish @ Shaileshbhai ... vs State Of Gujarat on 25 March, 2026
Author: Nikhil S. Kariel
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6922/2026 ORDER DATED: 25/03/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 6922 of 2026
==========================================================
JITENDRA @ JAGDISH @ SHAILESHBHAI BHAVANBHAI PARMAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MRJ RUTVIK J BRAHMBHATT(12345) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
PARTH J BRAHMBHATT(9373) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR KRUTIK PARIKH, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)
No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 25/03/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Parth Brahmbhatt appearing
on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public
Prosecutor MrKrutik Parikh appearing on behalf of the
respondent-State.
2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of
the respondent-State.
3. 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. I-07/2014 registered with Adalaj Police Station,
Gandhinagar for the offence punishable under Sections 395,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6922/2026 ORDER DATED: 25/03/2026
undefined
397, 201 of the IPC and Section 135 of the G.P.Act.
3.1. The applicant having been arrested in connection with
the aforesaid FIR, had been enlarged on regular bail by
learned Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated
27.10.2015 and whereas, since the applicant had not
remained present during the trial regularly, the learned Trial
Court had issued a non-bailable warrant against the present
applicant and the applicant having been arrested in
connection with the same on 04.02.2026, had moved an
application for being released before the learned Sessions
Court and the learned Sessions Court having rejected the said
application, the applicant has approached this Court by way of
present application.
4. Learned advocate for the applicant would submit that
considering the role attributed to the applicant, and nature of
the allegation levelled, the applicant 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 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6922/2026 ORDER DATED: 25/03/2026
undefined
released on bail.
5. As against the same, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - State has
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 applicant as coming out from
the charge-sheet, this Court may not exercise the discretion in
favour of the applicant and the application may be dismissed.
6. I have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of
the respective parties and perused the papers. Following
aspects are considered:-
i. The fact of the applicant having been released in a
substantive offence.
ii. The fact of the applicant having no antecedents.
iii. The fact of the voluntary submission made by learned
advocate Mr.Brahmbhatt under instruction that applicant is
ready and willing to deposit an amount of Rs.25,000/-
before the learned Trial Court, which amount shall stand a
surety for the applicant to attend the trial regularly.
iv. The fact of the applicant being in custody since
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6922/2026 ORDER DATED: 25/03/2026
undefined
04.02.2026 on account of the regular bail granted to him
being canceled.
v. Considering the above, while this Court is of the opinion
that the learned Sessions Court had committed no error in
not releasing the present applicant, yet, for the above
reasons, this Court is inclined to consider this application.
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.
8. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant
is ordered to be released on bail in connection with F.I.R.
registered as C.R. No. I-07/2014 registered with Adalaj Police
Station, Gandhinagar, on depositing Rs.25,000/- (Rupees
Twenty-Five Thousand Only) as a pre-condition of release on
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6922/2026 ORDER DATED: 25/03/2026
undefined
bail with the learned Trial Court and on executing a bond of
Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Fifty 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;
[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 Court 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 I.O.;
[f] attend the trial regularly.
9. In case the applicant does not remain present without
any reasonable cause and without any application for
exemption, for two consecutive adjournments, then the
learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to take out appropriate
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6922/2026 ORDER DATED: 25/03/2026
undefined
steps against the present applicant including but not limited
to forfeiting the amount in question.
9.1. If the applicant attends the trial regularly, irrespective
of the outcome of the trial, on an application by the applicant,
the amount deposited shall be refunded back to the applicant.
10. 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 Sessions Court 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 application of the applicant for being released
on regular bail.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6922/2026 ORDER DATED: 25/03/2026
undefined
13. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is
made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
permitted.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
Bhoomi
