Archive · 30 Sep 2026
Gujarat High Court Rejects Bail in Honey Trap Suicide Case
The Gujarat High Court refused to release a man on bail in a serious case.
He is accused of helping arrange a honey trap involving a 35-year-old man.
The accused allegedly recorded a compromising video and demanded Rs 10 lakh.
The victim later died by suicide.
Before his death, he reportedly described the accused’s role in a dying declaration.
The police also found five video clips that are being examined.
The accused said he was innocent and had been falsely accused.
The court said the allegations were serious and that evidence might be damaged if he were released.
It therefore kept him in custody and asked the trial court to move quickly.
The Gujarat High Court denied bail to a man accused of orchestrating a honey trap and extorting Rs 10 lakh.
The 35-year-old alleged victim died by suicide after reportedly being harassed and pressured over two to three months.
The court said the victim’s dying declaration named the accused and described his alleged role in the incident.
Police recovered five video clips from a mobile phone and sent them to a forensic science laboratory for examination.
The court cited the seriousness of the allegations and possible evidence tampering, and directed the trial court to expedite proceedings.
- Who
- The Gujarat High Court, Justice Hasmukh D Suthar, and a man accused of orchestrating the alleged honey trap; the alleged victim was a 35-year-old man.
- What
- The court rejected the accused’s bail application in a case involving alleged honey-trap extortion and the victim’s subsequent suicide.
- When
- The order was issued on September 23; the articles do not specify the year.
- Where
- The case was heard by the Gujarat High Court in Gujarat.
- Why
- The court cited the seriousness of the allegations, the victim’s dying declaration, and the possibility of evidence tampering.
Prosecution and Court’s View
Accused’s Defence
Alleged role in the honey trap
Prosecution and Court’s View
The prosecution alleged that the accused helped arrange the honey trap, recorded a compromising video, extorted Rs 10 lakh, and harassed the victim. The court noted that the victim’s dying declaration named the accused.
Accused’s Defence
The accused claimed he was innocent and had been falsely implicated. He argued that there had been no earlier allegation of a honey trap against him.
Bail and investigation status
Prosecution and Court’s View
The state argued that releasing the accused could lead to evidence tampering, especially because a co-accused was a police constable. The court said filing a chargesheet alone was not sufficient reason to grant bail.
Accused’s Defence
The defence argued that the investigation was complete, the chargesheet had been filed, and the complaint had been made belatedly.
Evidence and allegations
Prosecution and Court’s View
The state cited the dying declaration, earlier complaints, and five video clips sent for forensic examination. It alleged continuing physical and mental harassment of the victim.
Accused’s Defence
The defence disputed the allegations and maintained that the accused should not remain in custody after completion of the investigation.
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
- Judge
- Justice Hasmukh D Suthar
- Alleged extortion
- Rs 10 lakh
- Victim
- A 35-year-old man who died by suicide
- Evidence
- Five video clips were recovered and sent to a forensic science laboratory
- Bail decision
- Bail was denied
- Further direction
- The trial court was directed to expedite the trial