Kishanlal Govindram Kadva vs State Of Gujarat

Nikhil S. Kariel, J

Heard learned advocate Mr. Sunil Dave appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Manan Maheta appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.

Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent-State.

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. 11215037250299 of 2025 registered with Vidhyanagar Police Station, District Anand for the offence punishable under Sections 316(2), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(c) of the Information Technology Act.

Learned Advocate for the applicant would submit that the role of the present applicant was of aiding the main accused in committing the crime by preparing forged documents. Learned Advocate would submit that the applicant was not part of the principal conspiracy and whereas he had prepared the forged documents at the instance of the other accused for monetary gain. Learned Advocate would submit that while the applicants has two antecedents, he has been enlarged on regular bail by the learned Sessions Court in the said offence. Learned Advocate would submit that the main accused having been enlarged on regular bail though at successive stage, this Court may consider and release the present applicant on regular bail.

As against the same, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent – State has strongly opposed the grant of regular bail, submitting that serious role has been attributed to the present applicant. To a pointed query, learned APP could not dispute the fact that the main accused had been considered for being released on regular bail by the learned Co-ordinate Bench.

Having regard to the fact that the applicant has prayed for grant of regular bail, learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for further reasoned order.

I have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the papers. Following aspects are considered:-

i. The fact of of the main accused having been considered for being enlarged on regular bail by learned Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 13.10.2025 in Criminal Misc. Application No.18630/2025, albeit at successive stage.

ii. The fact that the applicant though has two antecedents, but in both the offences, the applicant having been released on regular bail by the learned Sessions Court.

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.

In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against 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.

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. 11215037250299 of 2025 registered with Vidhyanagar Police Station, District Anand, on executing a bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousands 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] Mark presence before the concerned Police Station once a month for a period of six months.

[f] furnish the proposed address of residence in the State of Gujarat 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.

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.

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.

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.

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.