IMPORTANT POINT
Bail – Merely because applicant was not named in FIR, such factor cannot in any manner influence discretion of Court to enlarge her on bail.

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

A.S. Supehia, J.—Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties through video conferencing.

2. This application is filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “the Code”) seeking regular bail in connection with F.I.R. registered as C.R. No.11211016200542 of 2020 with Dhrangadhra Taluka Police Station, District Surendranagar for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(i), 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of the Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organized Act, 2015 (for short “the Act”).

3. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Yatin Oza has submitted that the applicant may be released on bail since she has been wrongly roped in the aforesaid offence. He has submitted that five FIRs, which are registered against the present applicant, are clubbed together, for which separate trial will be connected, hence the applicant may not be made to suffer the rigors of the trial under the provisions of the Act. He has referred to Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India, and has submitted that no person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once and hence, the applicant may be released on bail.

3.1 Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Yatin Oza has further submitted that except one offence, which is registered under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “the IPC”) in the year 2016, all the other offence pertains to offence under Section 379 of the IPC and one offence under the provisions of Section 413 of the IPC.

3.2 While referring to various FIRs and charge-sheets registered against the applicant, it is contended that it cannot be said that the applicant is continuing in unlawful activity of an organized crime or she is part of an organized syndicate as defined under the Clause (f) of Section 2 of the Act. He has submitted that the FIRs, which are registered in the year 2018, 2019 and 2020 in the respective police stations pertains to the offence punishable under Section 379 of the IPC, which is not a serious offence. It is submitted that the last three FIRs are registered on the same day.

3.3 Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Yatin Oza has further submitted that in the afore-noted offence, except the offence punishable under Section 413 of the IPC, the applicant was not named in the FIR, but she has been named in the supplementary charge-sheets. It is submitted that looking to the contents of the FIR and the allegations made against the applicant, it is apparent that she is not remotely connected to an organized crime syndicate. It is submitted by him that the applicant is not a history-sheeter nor she is associated with any kind of syndicate. It is submitted that initially on 08.08.2020, police came to arrest one Hanif and after his arrest, the applicant was later on arrested. It is also submitted by him that after the arrest of one Mehmood Malaji before last August-September, 2020, the applicant has been falsely implicated on his statement. It is submitted that all the offences are registered on the statement of the co-accused, which cannot be considered as substantial piece of evidence and hence, she may be released on bail.

3.4 While referring to the definition of the Act, more particularly Section 2(c), learned Senior Advocate Mr. Yatin Oza has submitted that for filing of more than one charge-sheet for the offence punishable with more than 3 years imprisonment is not enough, but it must be satisfied that the unlawful activity is grave. It is submitted that if it is only an organized crime committed by an accused after the promulgation of the Act, the same has to be considered in light of the previous charge-sheet. In support of his submissions he has placed reliance on the judgment dated 06.05.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.38191 of 2021 by this Court. It is submitted that the applicant has not misused her liberty when s