R/CR.A/1238/2026(GJHC240399962026) JUDGMENT DATED: 24/09/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 1238 of 2026 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR ========================================================== Approved for Reporting Yes No √ ========================================================== HEMRAJSINH @HEMRAJ JORUBHA DHADHAL Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: MR DARSHANKUMAR P VEGAD(11612) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2 MS AKSHITABA SOLANKI(6782) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2 MS JYOTI BHATT, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 24/09/2026 JUDGMENT [1.0] ADMIT. Learned APP waives service of notice of Admission for and on behalf of the respondent No.1 – State of Gujarat and learned advocate Ms. Akshitaba Solanki waives service of notice of Admission for and on behalf of respondent No.2 – original complainant. [2.0] Present appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “Atrocity Act”) challenging the judgment and order dated 11.05.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge & Special Judge, Botad in Criminal Misc. Application No.294 of 2026 whereby the learned Judge rejected the application filed by the present appellant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. R/CR.A/1238/2026(GJHC240399962026) JUDGMENT DATED: 24/09/2026 No.11190001250459 of 2025 registered with Barwala Police Station, District Botad for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 115(2), 351(3) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”); section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short “Atrocity Act”). [3.0] Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the appellant is not involved in the commission of offence as alleged in the FIR and has been falsely enroped in the offence. Further, the appellant is behind the bars since 14.04.2026 and therefore, the appellant is required to be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable terms and conditions. [4.0] Per contra, learned APP appearing for the respondent – State as well as learned advocate appearing for the original complainant have vehemently opposed the present appeal and stated that there is prima facie evidence against the appellant. Further, the appellant has assaulted the victim with iron pipe and stick which has caused serious injuries to the victim and if released on bail then there is no possibility to stand to trial by the appellant and there is possibility of tampering with the evidence. Learned advocate for the original complainant has also tendered affidavit in reply on behalf of the original complainant, which is taken on record. Hence, they have requested to dismiss the present appeal. [5.0] I have given thoughtful consideration to the arguments canvassed by learned advocates for both the sides. It is pertinent to note that investigation is over and nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the present appellant as the charge-sheet is filed. Further, the injured victim is out of danger and discharged from the hospital. The allegation against the appellant is that he has hurled R/CR.A/1238/2026(GJHC240399962026) JUDGMENT DATED: 24/09/2026 castiest slur against the complainant and also assaulted with iron pipe and stick. Since charge-sheet is filed, nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the present appellant and apprehension on the part of learned advocate for the original complainant that the appellant will try to influence witnesses can be taken care of by imposing stringent condition. Even, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hitesh Verma vs. State of Uttarakhand reported in (2020) 10 SCC 710, bar of section 18 of the Atrocity Act would not be applicable. In view of the above, if the appellant is not released on bail then it will be pre-trial conviction and considering the principle of bail is rule and jail is exception, present appeal deserves consideration with appropriate conditions. 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. Further, the co- accused has been considered by the coordinate Bench and therefore, in view of decision of this Court in the case of Ramesh Batubhai Dabhi vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2011 (3) GLR 1150, appellant is entitled to the benefit of parity. [6.0] Hence, the present appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 11.05.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge & Special Judge, Botad in Criminal Misc. Application No.294/2026 is hereby quashed and set aside and the appellant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11190001250459 of 2025 registered with Barwala Police Station, District Botad on executing a personal bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that the appellant shall; [a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty; [b] not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution; R/CR.A/1238/2026(GJHC240399962026) JUDGMENT DATED: 24/09/2026 [c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week; [d] not leave the India without prior permission of the concerned trial court; [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 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 the concerned trial court; [h] shall not take undue advantage of liberty for prolonging the trial by taking unnecessary adjournment; [i] shall not enter In the vicinity of District Botad Police Station for a period of SIX MONTHS except for the purpose of marking presence before the concerned Police Station or for appearing before the learned trial Court; [7.0] The authorities shall release the appellant only if the appellant 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 Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. 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. [8.0] At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order. [9.0] Appeal is allowed accordingly. Direct service is permitted. (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.) Ajay Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: AJAY CHANDRAN MENON(HC00939), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 24/09/2026 17:17:44