Allowed

Ramnivas Keshavram Budiya v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC14 Sept 2026CR.MA/21461/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a regular bail application before the Gujarat High Court regarding an FIR under the Prohibition Act, the High Court granted bail after considering factors such as antecedents, investigation progress, and the nature of the offence, applying the principle that bail is the rule.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is enlarged on regular bail to be released on executing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with one local surety on specific conditions.

Ramnivas Keshavram Budiya Vs State of Gujarat — Bail and Remand | Gujarat HC (2026)

¶1

R/CR.MA/21461/2026 (GJHC240696692026)

¶2

ORDER DATED: 14/09/2026

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶4

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE

¶5

CHARGESHEET) NO. 21461 of 2026

¶6

==============================================

¶7

RAMNIVAS KESHAVRAM BUDIYA

¶8

Versus

¶9

STATE OF GUJARAT

¶10

============================================== Appearance:

¶11

MR MAUNISH T PATHAK(5892) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 SUNIL H PRAJAPATI(8350) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR HARDIK MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶12

==============================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

¶14

Date : 14/09/2026

¶15

ORDER

¶16

1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.

¶17

1. The present 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.11211040260248 of 2026 registered with Panshina Police Station, District - Surendranagar, for the offence under Sections 65-A, 65(e), 81, 83 and 98(2) of the Prohibition Act.

¶18

1. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence. Substantial part of investigation is over. Nothing is to be recovered or discovered from the applicant. He therefore submits that, considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.

¶19

1. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed the present application and submitted that, the applicant is very much involved in the present offence and considering the gravity of offence the present application does not deserve any consideration.

¶20

Page 1 of 4

¶21

R/CR.MA/21461/2026 (GJHC240696692026) ORDER DATED: 14/09/2026

¶22

1. While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the accused in the alleged offence, the jurisdiction to grant bail has to be exercised on the basis of the well settled principles having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case and the following factors are to be taken into consideration while considering an application for bail: (i) the nature of accusation and the severity of the punishment and the nature of the materials relied upon by the prosecution; (ii) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses and threat to the complainant or the witnesses; (iii) reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the time of trial or the likelihood of his abscondence; (iv) character behaviour and standing of the accused and the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused; (v) larger interest of the public or the State and similar other considerations are required to be considered.

¶23

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

¶24

(1) The applicant is the driver of Bolero from which liquor was found.;

¶25

(2) Applicant is behind the bar since 06.08.2026;

¶26

(3) Applicant has no past antecedents.;

¶27

(4) Substantial part of investigation is over;

¶28

(5) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant;

¶29

(6) Offence is triable by the Court of Magistrate.;

¶30

(7) Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will take some time.

¶31

1. 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 as well as in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs. Public

¶32

Page 2 of 4

¶33

R/CR.MA/21461/2026 (GJHC240696692026) ORDER DATED: 14/09/2026

¶34

Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1978)1 SCC 240. Obviously, the conclusion of trial will take time and keeping the accused behind the bars is nothing but amounts to pre-trial conviction and therefore, considering the celebrated principle of bail jurisprudence is that “bail is a rule and jail is exception” as well as the concept of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, present application deserves consideration .

¶35

In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the FIR, 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 regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11211040260248 of 2026 registered with Panshina Police Station, District - Surendranagar on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/(Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) with ONE LOCAL SURETY of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he;

¶36

(a) shall not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;

¶37

(b) shall not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution & shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and shall not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;

¶38

¶39

(d) shall not leave the territory of India without prior permission of the Trial Court concerned;

¶40

(e) shall mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in a week till filing of the chargesheet and after filing of the chargesheet, mark presence before the concerned police station once in a month for a period of six months;

¶41

Page 3 of 4

¶42

R/CR.MA/21461/2026 (GJHC240696692026) ORDER DATED: 14/09/2026

¶43

(f) shall furnish the copy of Aadhaar card, email ID, contact number, permanent and present address of his residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence and contact number/SIM card without prior permission of Trial Court;

¶44

(g) if the applicant is found to be indulged in any illegal activities in future, the trial Court concerned will be free to issue warrant and cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶45

1. 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 Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.

¶46

1. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of above conditions in accordance with law.

¶47

1. At the trial, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature qua the evidence at this stage made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶48

1. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.

¶49

(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)

¶50

ANKIT JANSARI

¶51

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 14/09/2026 15:51:18

¶52

Page 4 of 4

Ramnivas Keshavram Budiya v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramnivas Keshavram Budiya v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases