Gujarat High Court Denies Bail To College Professor Accused Of Seeking Sexual Favours From Student, Cites Incriminating Chats

The Gujarat High Court denied bail to a college professor accused of sexually harassing, sending inappropriate messages on WhatsApp and making inappropriate sexual demands from his student.

Justice Nikhil S Kariel in his order referred to documents on record as well as the charge-sheet papers including the statement of the victim under Section 183 of the BNSS and said that the court was not inclined to grant bail for the following reasons:

i. The offence was very serious inasmuch as, the petitioner, a professor in a college is alleged to have sought "sexual favours from the victim".

ii. The allegations "prima facie" finds support in the charge-sheet papers, particularly wherein the court had perused a document in the nature of an apology letter by the petitioner a day before his arrest i.e. on 25.11.2025 addressed to the principal of the college. In this letter, the court noted, the petitioner had sought for an "apology for his inappropriate behaviour and also the inappropriate chats with the students including the present victim".

It also appeared, the court said, that copy of the chats which were placed on record clearly reflected that "inappropriate demands having been made by the present applicant to the victim".

iii. The court said that it appeared that the petitioner was "pressurizing the victim to come to his chamber and pressurizing the victim to enter into a relationship" with him.

iv. It also appeared, the court said, that the petitioner was pressurizing another student to come to his chamber wherein the WhatsApp chats reflected that after a voice call made by petitioner, the concerned student had blocked the his mobile number.

"This Court has also perused the statement of the prosecutrix/victim under Section 183 of the BNSS and whereas it would appear that the victim has clearly stood by her version, which had been originally recorded before the Investigating Officer, inasmuch as, that the present applicant had sought for inappropriate/sexual favours from the victim and whereas he had also touched the victim inappropriately. While learned Advocate Mr. Shaikh would heavily rely upon the deposition of the complainant i.e. mother of the victim, before the learned Trial Court, and would submit that the complainant has turned hostile, yet, perusing the statement of the complainant, prima facie, it does not appear that the complainant has turned hostile entirely, and whereas her version with regard to an incident which had taken place between 18.11.2025 to 24.11.2025 appears to be the part where the complainant may have resiled from her earlier version," the court said.

However since the trial is ongoing, the high court was of the opinion that any observations by it in that regard may adversely prejudice either the applicant's or victim's case and whereas under such circumstances, the Court refrained from observing anything upon the issue of victim allegedly turning hostile.

"Having considered the above since it appears to this Court that the present applicant, being a professor of a college, had prima facie sought inappropriate sexual favours from the victim, who was his student and whereas since there appears to be enough material which has been collected by the Investigating Officer, in support of the allegation and also having regard to the fact that the present does not appear to be a case of delayed trial, rather it appears to be a case of the machinery of the Court having moved efficiently and well within time, more particularly though the applicant was arrested on 26.11.2025 and whereas by now, the trial has commenced and even the complainant as noticed hereinabove has been examined on 09.03.2026. Thus, on merits as well as on the ground that the trial is not at all delayed, this Court is not inclined to exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant".

The court was hearing the man's bail plea booked under Sections 75(2) (sexual harassment) and 78(1) (stalking) BNS.

The petitioner's counsel contended that the allegation against him was that he had ensured that the victim would fail in the subject that the petitioner was teaching, however as per the her deposition in the trial it appears that the petitioner was not teaching the victim at all.

It was submitted that the victim had turned hostile before the Trial Court wherein she had resiled from her statement given before the Investigating Officer and whereas under such circumstances, the court may consider granting bail.

The State drew the court's attention to statement of the victim under Section 183 BNSS and said that she had stood by her version as stated before the Investigating Officer. The counsel referred to an apology letter by the petitioner before the school management, particularly wherein the petitioner had apologized for his behaviour with two students including the victim for having entered into inappropriate WhatsApp messages with these students.

The complainant's counsel opposed the petitioner's submission that the complainant had turned hostile and said that a perusal of her deposition would reveal that while the prosecution's counsel had requested that the complainant may be declared as hostile and sought permission to cross-examine her, however the hostile part was with regard to only a small part of the deposition and not the entire deposition.

The bail plea was dismissed.

Case title: MANISHKUMAR SHIVLAL CHAUHAN v/s STATE OF GUJARAT

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL-AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 3576 of 2026

Click Here To Read/Download Order