IMPORTANT POINT
Ordinarily, a bail application, in a case of a nature, which involves security of State should be rejected.

JUDGMENT

S.B. Sinha, J. —

1.Leave granted.

2.These appeals arise out of the judgments and orders dated 8.9.2006 as also the judgment and order dated 10.8.2006 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No. 334 of 2005 and Criminal Appeal No. 751 of 2006 respectively whereby and whereunder the bail petitions filed by both the appellants were dismissed. A First Information Report was lodged on or about 4.4.2003 for commission of an alleged offence under Section 120(B), 121, 121(A), 122 and 123 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 25(1)(b), 25(1)(c), 27 and 29 of the Arms Act in the D.C.B. Police Station, Ahmedabad. The names of the appellants, however, did not figure in the said First Information Report. The first informant was one Tarun Kumar Amrutlai Barot, Police Inspector, Ahmedabad Crime Branch. An information was received that after the Godhra massacre some youths from Ahmedabad City had gone to Pakistan for obtaining training for carrying out terrorist activities with a view to take revenge of loss of lives and properties caused to the Muslim community in communal riots which had taken place therein and they have returned back to India after training. An investigation was carried out. On the allegations that he was a party to the conspiracy, Appellant Afzal Khan was arrested on 15.4.2003. We may notice that a First Information Report almost on the same terms was registered in Hyderabad on or about 19.4.2003 wherein also allegations had been made that a group of boys had gone to Pakistan for terrorist training. Appellant Saiyed Ejaz Ahmed @ Chota Ejaz who is a resident of Hyderabad was arrested in connection with the said case on 3.12.2003. During investigation of the Ahmedabad case also, Appellant Saiyed Ijaz Ahmed was arrested by the Gujarat Police on 14.12.2003.

3.A chargesheet against the first appellant was filed on 10.9.2003 and a chargesheet against the second appellant was filed on 21.1.2004.

4.In both the cases, confessional statements of various persons accused of commission of the said offence were recorded. Pursuant to such confessional statements of the appellant as also those of the co-accused, a huge quantity of arm was recovered from the first appellant. The principal allegations against the second appellant are that he had gone to Pakistan for training.

5.It is also not in dispute that the first appellant had moved the learned Special Judge as also the High Court for grant of bail which had been rejected. It now appears that charges have also been framed on 1.12.2005.

6.Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, learned counsel appearing for the first appellant and Ms. Lata Krishnamurthy, learned counsel appearing for the second appellant would inter alia submit that the appellants should have been enlarged on bail as :-

(i)No overt act has been attributed against them.

(ii)Confessions have been obtained subsequent to their arrest.

(iii)Recovery of any weapon by itself would not lead to any conviction under TADA.

(iv)Confessions of Mohammed Riyaz @ Goru, Mohammed Parvez Abdul Kayyum Shaikh and Mohammed Yunus were recorded on 24.4.2003 in similar language and hence do not inspire confidence.

(v) Purported Confessions of two more accused had been recorded in the year 2005 alleging that the first appellant had rendered monetary help to the group was also recorded in similar language.

(vi)In view of the decisions of this Court in Shaheen Welfare Association v Union of India and Ors.1 [(1996) 2 SCC 616], People’s Union for Civil Liberties and Another v Union of India2 [(2004) 9 SCC 580], State of Maharashtra v Sitaram Popat Vetal and Another3 [(2004) 7 SCC 521], State (NCT of Delhi) v Navjot Sandhu alias Afsan Guru4 [(2005) 11 SCC 600], the appellants are entitled to grant of bail.

7.Ms. Hemantika Wahi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, on the other hand, brought to our notice that the trial has already commenced and two witnesses have been examined. It was pointed out that as some other