R/CR.MA/22355/2026(GJHC240720322026) ORDER DATED: 24/09/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 22355 of 2026 ============================================== JERAMBHAI DALABHAI SINDHAV Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ============================================== Appearance: MR LAXMANSINH M ZALA(5787) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ============================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 24/09/2026 ORDER 1) RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for the respondent – State. 2) The present bail application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11211025260363 of 2026 registered with Joravarnagar Police Station, District - Surendranagar, for the offence punishable under Sections 108, 308(5), 308(6), 351(3), 352, 115(2) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”). 3) Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence. Investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed. He has further submitted that the impugned complaint is filed belatedly and no allegations are levelled in the statements or accidental death case. The video recording is not collected during the course of investigation. Prior to commission of the offence no allegations of any honey trap have been levelled against the applicant. Hence, he has requested to allow the present application. Page 1 of 6 R/CR.MA/22355/2026(GJHC240720322026) ORDER DATED: 24/09/2026 4) Learned APP appearing for the respondent – State of Gujarat has vehemently opposed the present application on the ground that present applicant has actively participated in the offence. The applicant is a kingpin and involved in a serious offence as the applicant has led the honey trap and shoot a video of the deceased in compromised condition with one lady and extorted Rs.10 lakhs from the deceased. Time and again the applicant hurled abusive language and physically and mentally harassed the deceased. Not only that in this regard numbers of complaints have been filed before the police authority but as the co-accused who happens to be brother of the applicant, who is serving as Police Constable, no fruitful outcome was there, instead under the pretext of compromise no one has paid heed to the said complaints. Even in number of complaints filed prior to the said incident bail to the applicant and co-accused were taken for good behaviour which clearly shows constant harassment by the applicant and co- accused. The Dying Declaration of the deceased was recorded and on the same line five video clips were found from the mobile which were sent to the FSL for examination and the report of the FSL is awaited. One co-accused is Police Constable and other co-accused are arrested and identified. If the applicant is released on bail then possibility of tampering with the evidence cannot be ruled out. Therefore, she has requested to dismiss the present application. 5) Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and upon perusal of the investigation papers, it appears that the brother of the complainant aged 35 years has committed suicide leaving behind a suicide note naming the applicant and alleged that after the wife of deceased left him, the applicant planned a honey trap with a girl and the applicant made the deceased consume alcohol and recorded a video of the deceased when the deceased was found in a compromising position with the girl. The said incident of honey trap came to be orchestrated by the applicant and based on the R/CR.MA/22355/2026(GJHC240720322026) ORDER DATED: 24/09/2026 said video the applicant used to blackmail the deceased and extorted Rs.10 lakhs and thereafter also continued to physically and mentally harass the applicant. In this regard various complaints were filed. Further it reveals that the deceased has also owe money to the applicant and as the deceased used to demand the said amount from the applicant at that time the applicant administered threat to the deceased. In this regard various complaints in the form of applications were filed before the police authority and in some applications bail bond and surety for good behaviour was taken and other were settled as intervened by the leaders of the society. Initially an Accidental Death Case No.6 of 2026, was registered with Joravarnagar Police Station, wherein, the complainant has stated about accidental death of her brother. The main argument of the learned Advocate for the applicant is that in the suicide complaint the complainant has not stated about honey trap, but in the Dying Declaration of the deceased role of the applicant is clearly spelled out and in the transcribe of video clip produced along with compilation specific allegations are levelled against the applicant, wherein clearly stated that since last 2 to 3 months the accused persons are causing mental and physical torture and forced him to settle or withdraw the application filed before the police authority. Further it is alleged that prior to 8 to 10 months the applicant called the deceased on his filed and one girl was called and the applicant forcefully made the deceased consume the liquor and when the deceased developed physical relationship with the girl, the applicant shoot their video and thereafter extorted Rs.10 lakhs from the deceased. Further, he has also tried to take favour of his uncle and harass the deceased and further it is clearly stated that the complainant has raised grievance five times about the video and honey trap before Dhangadhra Police Station but due to influence of the brother of the applicant who is also the co- accused who is serving as Police Constable, the police did not willing to accept the complaint. In view of the aforesaid, the R/CR.MA/22355/2026(GJHC240720322026) ORDER DATED: 24/09/2026 arguments canvassed by the learned Advocate for the applicant is not acceptable. 6) Even otherwise, perusing the record reveals that number of complaints were filed with Joravarnagar Police Station and Dhrangadhra Police Station addressed to the Police Inspector and Superintendent of Police also about constant harassment. Perusing the report it appears that there were persistent harassment and proximity. Since last May three applications were filed about persistent harassment by the applicant and co-accused and Chapter Case was filed and bail bond and surety was taken for good behaviour which clearly indicates constant persistent harassment on the part of the accused persons. 7) The material collected during the investigation clearly reveals highhandedness on the part of the accused persons and they exerted pressure on the ordinary man. As per the Section 54 of BNS, whenever any person, who is absent, also liable to punish as an abettor, is presence when the act of offence for which he would be punishable in consequence of abetment is committed, he shall be deemed to have committed such act of offence. The applicant has actively participated in the offence. It is needless to say that 'life is dear one'. The growing culture of violence, extortion, honey trap and exploitation in society sends shock-waves through the civilized world. When such incidents occur or continue, there is a constant erosion of basic human values, such as tolerance and the spirit of 'live and let live.' The perpetuation of such crimes, which result in the loss of lives, raises serious concerns. 8) Learned advocate for the applicant has requested for bail also on the ground that investigation is over and charge-sheet is already filed however, it is needless to say that merely charge-sheet is filed is not a ground to release the applicant on bail. In this regard reference is required to be made to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Virupakshappa Gouda vs. State of R/CR.MA/22355/2026(GJHC240720322026) ORDER DATED: 24/09/2026 Karnataka reported in (2017) 5 SCC 406, wherein it is held as under : “13. ………. Needless to say, filing of the charge-sheet does not in any manner lessen the allegations made by the prosecution. On the contrary, filing of the charge-sheet establishes that after due investigation the investigating agency, having found materials, has placed the charge-sheet for trial of the accused persons.” In view of the above, after filing of the charge-sheet, allegations made by the prosecution have not lessen in any manner. Herein, the alleged offence is against the society and therefore also, no case is made out for exercise of discretion under Section 483 of the BNSS. 9) Therefore, in view of decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P. Through CBI vs. Amarmani Tripathi reported in (2005)8 SCC 21, and considering the gravity and seriousness of the offence and the co-accused serving in Police Department, the possibility of tampering with evidence cannot be ruled out if the applicant is released on bail. 10) For the foregoing reasons, this Court is of view that present is not a fit case to exercise discretion under Section 483 of the BNSS in favour of the applicant. Accordingly, present application does not deserve any consideration and is hereby dismissed. However, the learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as the applicant is an under-trial prisoner for which the applicant shall also cooperate. 11) It is made clear that the observations made in the present order are tentative in nature and the learned trial Court shall decide the case of the applicant independently on its own merits without being influenced by the observations made in the present order. Page 5 of 6 R/CR.MA/22355/2026(GJHC240720322026) ORDER DATED: 24/09/2026 12) If the applicant fails to engage an Advocate then the applicant shall be provided legal aid under Section 341 of the BNSS for expeditious disposal of the trial in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ummed Devi vs. The State of Rajasthan and Anr. [2026 INSC 931]. The applicant is directed to cooperate with the learned trial Court to cooperate in expeditious trial. Rule is hereby discharged. (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) ANKIT JANSARI Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE ONE, at High Court of Gujarat on 24/09/2026 17:20:16