Gujarat High Court
Kiranbhai Lakshmanbhai Solanki vs State Of Gujarat on 24 April, 2026
Author: Nikhil S. Kariel
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/9601/2026 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
CHARGESHEET) NO. 9601 of 2026
==========================================================
KIRANBHAI LAKSHMANBHAI SOLANKI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. RAHUL R DHOLAKIA(6765) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 24/04/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Rahul R. Dholakia appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Hardik Mehta appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.
2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent-State.
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. 11203030260229 of 2026 registered with Keshod Police Station, District Junagadh, for the offence punishable under Sections 318(3), 318(4), 336(2), 338, 336(3), 340, 345, 347(1), 349, 350 and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 78, 79 of the Trade Mark and Merchandise Act, 1958 and Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by BHUPENDRASINH SONAGRA(HC01082) on Fri Apr 24 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 25 05:56:37 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9601/2026 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026 undefined Sections 103, 104 and 108 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
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 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 has 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 affidavit of the Investigating Officer, 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. Allegation being that the accused had used counterfeit trade mark, for selling bidi, i.e. the trade mark of the complainant. ii. It would appear that the complainant is owner of a trade mark in the name of M/s Sable Bidi etc. and whereas the accused are alleged Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by BHUPENDRASINH SONAGRA(HC01082) on Fri Apr 24 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 25 05:56:37 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9601/2026 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026 undefined to have counterfeited the said trade mark and were selling bidi under the said name. The present applicant appears to be selling the same at the instance of the co-accused.
iii. While it would appear that the punishments, under the Trade Marks Act, would be not less than six months which can extend to three years, yet, this Court takes a note of the fact that the Investigating Officer has invoked offence punishable under Section 338 of the BNS, which is forgery of valuable security etc., which carries imprisonment upto 10 years which may extend to life. Though the said section is invoked, considering the fact that the present prima facie appears to be a case where the trade mark has been used, this Court is inclined to consider this application.
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.
Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by BHUPENDRASINH SONAGRA(HC01082) on Fri Apr 24 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 25 05:56:37 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9601/2026 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026 undefined
8. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11203030260229 of 2026 registered with Keshod Police Station, District Junagadh, on executing a bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five 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 for a period of six months before the concerned police station.
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 Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by BHUPENDRASINH SONAGRA(HC01082) on Fri Apr 24 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 25 05:56:37 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9601/2026 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026 undefined 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) BDSONGARA Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by BHUPENDRASINH SONAGRA(HC01082) on Fri Apr 24 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 25 05:56:37 IST 2026