R/CR.MA/21465/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/12/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 21465 of 2025 ========================================================== ASHISHKUMAR THAVARAJI BHAGORA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance: MS HANIBEN H JOSHI(12871) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR MANAN MAHETA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 24/12/2025 ORAL ORDER [1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State. [2.0] The present successive bail application is led under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11209055240490 of 2024 registered with Vijaynagar Police Station, Dist. Sabarkantha, for the o.ence under Sections 103(1) and 352 of BNS and Section 135 of the GP Act. [3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the o.ence. Investigation is over and chargesheet has been led. He is in jail since 05.08.2024. It is submitted that, there is no substantial progress in the trial and trial is at snail stage. Material witnesses are yet to be examined and eyewitness is not appearing before the authority. Even perusing the allegation against the applicant, there was no enmity in the quarrel. Applicant has no past antecedent. Considering the same, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions. [4.0] Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed the present application and submitted that, after ling of the R/CR.MA/21465/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/12/2025 chargesheet, there is no change in the circumstances. Hence, no case is made out to entertain present successive bail application. Furthermore, from the PM report, it appears that due to head injury, deceased was died and as per the case of the prosecution, injury is co-related. Still 21 material witnesses are yet to be examined and therefore, possibility cannot be ruled out to tamper with the evidence and hamper the witnesses. Considering the same, he prays not to allow application. [5.0] While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the accused in the alleged o.ence, the jurisdiction to grant bail has to be exercised on the basis of the well settled principles having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case and the following factors are to be taken into consideration while considering an application for bail: (i) the nature of accusation and the severity of the punishment and the nature of the materials relied upon by the prosecution; (ii) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses and threat to the complainant or the witnesses; (iii) reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the time of trial or the likelihood of his abscondence; (iv) character behaviour and standing of the accused and the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused; (v) larger interest of the public or the State and similar other considerations are required to be considered. [6.0] I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the investigation papers. Following aspects have been considered: (1) Investigation is over and chargesheet has been led; (2) Applicant is in jail since 05.08.2024. (3) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant; (4) From the progress report submitted by Police authority, it appears that the applicant is arrested on 05.08.2024 and thereafter, accused has engaged an advocate on 09.12.2024. During one year, only 6 witnesses have been examined. Still 21 witnesses are yet to be examined. On 16.10.2025, deposition of complainant is recorded and thereafter, matter is adjourned for cross-examination on R/CR.MA/21465/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/12/2025 13.11.2025 and thereafter, no material witnesses are examined. Considering the progress in trial, there is no possibility to conclude the trial in near future. Therefore, without further discussion on merit, on the ground of delay also, applicant may be granted bail. (5) Applicant has no past antecedent. [7.0] In view of the law laid down in the cases of (i) Amar Sadhuram Mulchandani Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024, (ii) Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), reported in AIR 2023 SC 1648 and (iii) Union of India Vs. Najeeb, reported in 2021 (3) SCC 713, as well as considering other aspects like long incarceration period of the applicant, gravity of o.ence and as trial is prolonged since long, bail can be granted to the accused as speedy trial is right of the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Hence, present application deserves consideration. [8.0] This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012]1 SCC 40 as well as in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1978)1 SCC 240. Obviously, the conclusion of trial will take time and keeping the accused behind the bars is nothing but amounts to pre-trial conviction and therefore, considering the celebrated principle of bail jurisprudence is that “bail is a rule and jail is exception” as well as the concept of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, present application deserves consideration. [9.0] In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the FIR, without discussing further on merit, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a t case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11209055240490 of 2024 registered with Vijaynagar Police Station, Dist. Sabarkantha on R/CR.MA/21465/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/12/2025 executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-ve Thousand only) with one local 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 to leave India 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; (f) furnish the Aadhar card, email ID/present address of his residence to the Investigating OGcer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence/contact number without prior permission of Trial Court; (g) if the applicant is found to be indulged in any illegal activities in future, the trial Court concerned will be free to issue warrant and cancel the bail granted to the applicant. (h) Not to enter into territorial limits of Vijaynagar Police Station till material witnesses are examined, except to mark presence at the concerned police station and concerned trial Court. [10.0] The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other o.ence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. [11.0] 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 R/CR.MA/21465/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/12/2025 and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law. [12.0] At the trial, the trial Court shall not be inIuenced by the observations of preliminary nature qua the evidence at this stage made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail. [13.0] Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) SUCHIT Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: PATEL SUCHIT JAYESHBHAI(HC01083), Private Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 24/12/2025 14:28:41