YAMIN @MORIS HAFEJI S/O YAKUB IBRAHIM PATEL vs STATE OF GUJARAT

R/CR.A/1411/2026 (GJHC240462012026) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (REGULAR BAIL) NO. 1411 of 2026
==========================================================
YAMIN @MORIS HAFEJI S/O YAKUB IBRAHIM PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR OI PATHAN(7684) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
MS VRUNDA C SHAH, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

Date : 01/09/2026
JUDGMENT
Though served, none appears for the respondent No.2.
[1.0] ADMIT. Learned APP waives service of notice of Admission for
and on behalf of the respondent No.1 – State of Gujarat.
[2.0] Present appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Caste and
Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter
referred to as “Atrocity Act”) challenging the common judgment and
nd
order dated 25.03.2026 passed by the learned 2 Additional Sessions
Judge, Bharuch in Criminal Misc. Application No.221 of 2026 whereby
the learned Judge rejected the application filed by the present
appellant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R.
No.11199011260002 of 2026 registered with Bharuch Rural Police
Station, District Bharuch for the offences punishable under Sections
79, 115(2), 117(1), 118(2), 352, 351(3), 189(2), 189(4), 191(1), 191(2),
191(3) and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”);
sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(y), 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(1)(za)A, 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va)
Page 1 of 4
Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Tue Sep 01 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 18:49:08 IST 2026

R/CR.A/1411/2026 (GJHC240462012026) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act (for short “Atrocity Act”) and section 135 of the Gujarat
Police Act.
[3.0] Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the
appellant is not involved in the commission of offence and has been
falsely enroped in the offence and investigation is over and charge-
sheet is filed. Further, the applicant is behind the bars since
15.01.2026 and therefore, the appellant is required to be enlarged on
regular bail by imposing suitable terms and conditions.
[4.0] Per contra, learned APP appearing for the respondent – State
has vehemently opposed the present appeal and stated that there is
prima facie evidence against the appellant and if released on bail then
there is no possibility to stand to trial by the appellant and there is
possibility of tampering with the evidence and hence, she has
requested to dismiss the present appeal.
[5.0] I have given thoughtful consideration to the arguments
canvassed by learned advocates for both the sides.
[5.1] The case of the prosecution is that the appellant inflicted iron
pipe blow on the nose of the complainant and except this, no role is
attributed to the present appellant however, the injured is out of
danger and discharged from the hospital and in this regard complaint
is filed. It is pertinent to note that investigation is over and nothing is
required to be recovered or discovered from the present appellant
since the charge-sheet is filed. Further, in view of the decision of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hitesh Verma vs. State of
Uttarakhand reported in (2020) 10 SCC 710 , bar of section 18 of the
Atrocity Act would not be applicable. In view of the above, if the
Page 2 of 4
Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Tue Sep 01 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 18:49:08 IST 2026

R/CR.A/1411/2026 (GJHC240462012026) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
appellant is not released on bail then it will be pre-trial conviction and
considering the principle of bail is rule and jail is exception and this
Court has also considered the fact that the appellant is not having any
past antecedent, present appeal deserves consideration with
appropriate conditions. 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 . Further, the co-accused has been considered by the
coordinate Bench and therefore, in view of decision of this Court in
the case of Ramesh Batubhai Dabhi vs. State of Gujarat reported in
2011 (3) GLR 1150, appellant is entitled to the benefit of parity.
[6.0] Hence, the present appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated
nd
25.03.2026 passed by the learned 2 Additional Sessions Judge,
Bharuch in Criminal Misc. Application No.221/2026 is hereby quashed
and set aside and the appellant is ordered to be released on regular
bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11199011260002 of 2026
registered with Bharuch Rural Police Station, District Bharuch on
executing a personal bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand
Only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial
Court and subject to the conditions that the appellant 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 India without prior permission of the concerned
trial court;
[e] mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in a
month for a period of six months between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00
Page 3 of 4
Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Tue Sep 01 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 18:49:08 IST 2026

R/CR.A/1411/2026 (GJHC240462012026) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
p.m.;
[f] furnish the present address of residence to the Investigating
Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond
and shall not change the residence without prior permission of
the concerned trial court;
[h] shall not take undue advantage of liberty for prolonging
the trial by taking unnecessary adjournment;
[7.0] The authorities shall release the appellant only if the appellant
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. 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.
[8.0] At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima
facie observations made by this Court in the present order.
[9.0] Appeal is allowed accordingly. Direct service is permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)
Ajay
Page 4 of 4
Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Tue Sep 01 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 01 18:49:08 IST 2026