R/CR.MA/24939/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/02/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 24939 of 2025 ======================================================== BALDEV @ BALI VIRBHANU DANGAR & ANR. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ======================================================== Appearance: MR VIRAT G POPAT(3710) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2 MR TRUPESH KATHIRIYA ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ======================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL Date : 10/02/2026 ORAL ORDER 1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Virat Popat on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Trupesh Kathiriya on behalf of respondent- State. 2. Rule. Learned APP and learned Advocate waive service of rule on behalf of the respective respondents. 3. The present applicants who have been arraigned as accused have preferred this application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the applicants on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 75 of 2014 registered with Lodhika Police Station, District: Rajkot for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 341, 384, 387, 389, 465, 467, 471, 506(2), 504 and 120(b) of the Indian Penal Code after filing of the charge-sheet. p. 2 R/CR.MA/24939/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/02/2026 4. It would appear that the applicants having been arraigned as accused for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 341, 384, 387, 389, 465, 467, 471, 506(2), 504 and 120(b) of the Indian Penal Code, had approached the learned Sessions Court for being released on regular bail and whereas vide an order dated 22.05.2015, learned Co-ordinate Bench had considered their case for being enlarged on regular bail. It would appear that the bail order inter alia contained a condition that they shall not engage in offences of similar nature or any other offence and whereas it appears that since the present applicants had allegedly misused the liberty granted to them, an application for cancellation of bail had been preferred and vide an order dated 02.05.2022 learned Co-ordinate Bench in Criminal Misc. Application No. 11447 of 2015 had cancelled the bail granted to the present applicants amongst others. 4.1 It would appear that the said decision had been challenged by the applicants before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and vide an order dated 13.10.2025, the Hon’ble Supreme Court while not entertaining the challenge, had directed that if the applicants surrender on or before 24.10.2025 then it would be open for the applicants to prefer an application for bail before appropriate forum and whereas in case they do not surrender till the said date, then while the Trial Court was directed to take all possible coercive measures, the applicants were to remain in jail till conclusion of the trial. It is pointed out that the applicants having surrendered before 24.10.2025 had sought for being enlarged on regular bail and vide an order dated 14.11.2025, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gondal had rejected the said application, aggrieved by which the applicants have approached this Court. Page 2 of 6 R/CR.MA/24939/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/02/2026 5. Learned Advocate on behalf of the applicants would submit that considering the role attributed to the applicants, and nature of the allegation levelled against, the applicants 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 applicants in jail for indefinite period. It is further submitted that applicants are ready and willing to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this Court if released on bail. 6. The present application is vehemently objected to by learned APP on behalf of respondent- State by submitting that looking to the nature of offence and the role attributed to the present applicants, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant and the application may be dismissed. 7. This Court has heard learned Advocates for the respective parties and perused the FIR including charge-sheet as well as order passed by learned Session Court as well as affidavit filed by the investigating officer before the learned Trial Court. 8. This Court has also considered the following aspects: (i) It would appear that the fact of the applicants having been granted regular bail, vide an order of the year 2015 in the present offence, could not be ignored more particularly the said liberty being cancelled since the subsequent conduct of the applicants was not upto the mark. (ii) The above observation being elaborated to mean that a p. 4 R/CR.MA/24939/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/02/2026 competent court having considered the case of the applicants, and had released the applicants on regular bail while the consideration remained, since the applicants had misused their liberty, the bail had been cancelled. (iii) The fact of the applicants being in custody as of now since around four months and according to learned Advocate Mr. Popat at the relevant point of time in the year 2015 the applicants were in custody for around more than six months before they have been enlarged on bail. (iv) While applicants are stated to have various antecedents, it would appear that the antecedents are of the year 2014-15 and whereas there is only one FIR of the year 2016 and there is no FIR after. (v) This Court has also taken into consideration the maximum punishment that could be imposed insofar as the offence is concerned. 9. 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. 10. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicants 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 p. 5 R/CR.MA/24939/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/02/2026 applicant on regular bail. 11. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicants are ordered to be released on bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 75 of 2014 registered with Lodhika Police Station, District: Rajkot on executing a bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand ) 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] Mark presence in the concerned Police Station once in every 15 days till the commencement of trial; [f] 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 residential address without prior intimation to the I.O. 12. The Authorities will release the applicants 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 Judge concerned will be free to take appropriate action in the matter. 13. 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 p. 6 R/CR.MA/24939/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/02/2026 and/or relax any of the above conditions in accordance with law. 14. 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. 15. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. (NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J) NIRU