VIKTARBHAI S/O. JONEBHAI SHELAT v. STATE OF GUJARAT
Court: High Court of Gujarat
Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Gujarat judgment dated 2026-03-16. VIKTARBHAI S/O. JONEBHAI SHELAT v. STATE OF GUJARAT. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 3535 of 2026 ========================================================== VIKTARBHAI S/O. JONBHAI SHELAT Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: MR CHETAN B RAVAL(2090) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR UTKARSH SHARMA ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL Date : 16/03/2026 ORAL ORDER 1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Chetan Raval appearing on behalf of the applicant, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Utkarsh Sharma appearing on behalf of the respondent-State and learned advocate Mr. Dhruv Thakkar, who has instructions to appear on behalf of respondent no. 2 and that he may be permitted to file his Vakalatnama. 2. Rule.
Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent-State and learned advocate Mr. Thakore waives service of rule on behalf of respondent no. 2. 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. 11191024251473 of 2025 registered with Ramol Police Station, Ahmedabad City, for the offence punishable under Sections 75(1) (I) of the BNS and Sections 7, 8 of the POCSO Act. 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 released on bail. 5. As against the same, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent – State and learned advocate for respondent no. 2 have 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 allegation in the FIR being of harassment and whereas it would appear that the parties have entered into a settlement, more particularly all the parties living in the same and according to the party, the FIR being result of the misunderstanding between the parties. ii. The fact of the present applicant being in custody since 13. 12. 2025 and the charge-sheet having been laid by the Investigating Officer. 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. 11191024251473 of 2025 registered with Ramol Police Station, Ahmedabad City, on executing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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] mark presence once a month before the concerned police station for a period of six months. 9.
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. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. (NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J) Y. N. VYAS Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: YAGNESH NARENDRABHAI VYAS(HC00207), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 17/03/2026 11:42:17
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.