( 1 ) RULE. Service of Rule is waived by ld. PP Mr. Oza for the State. With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today. 1-A. THIS application is filed by the applicant-accused under Section 439 of Cr. P. Code for releasing him on bail in connection with I. CR No. 169 of 1995 registered at Shahpur Police Station, Ahmedabad City on 25. 11. 1995 for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 469, 471 and 201 of IPC and under Sections 25 (1a), (1-AA), 1 (B),3 and 29 of the Arms Act and section 9 of the Explosive Act.

( 2 ) UNDISPUTEDLY, the applicant is in judicial custody since 7. 12. 1995 in connection with the aforesaid offences. He has been chargesheeted along with other co-accused on 26. 11. 1996. Initially, the case of the present applicant and the co-accused was committed under Section 209 of Crpc to the Court of Sessions by ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad City, but after hearing the application preferred praying discharge from the said offence punishable under Section of 25 (1-AA) of the Arms Act, the ld. Sessions Judge, discharged the accused of the offence under Section 25 (1-AA) of the Arms Act. The ld. Sessions Judge ultimately remanded the proceedings back to the Court of ld. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad as other offences are triable by the ld. Magistrate.

( 3 ) I have carefully considered the allegations and gravity of the offence pointed out from FIR lodged by the Deputy Supdt. of Police, ATS, Ahmedabad. On the day of registration of the alleged offence, the petitioner was dealing in Arms through the firm named M/s B. D. Patel and Sons, at Mirzapur, Ahmedabad. Initially, the father of the applicant accused late Mr. Marzban Patel was carrying on business of arms and ammunition under different licences issued by the competent authority under the Arms Act. Said firm was a proprietary firm and business was proprietary firm business. After the death of Mr. Marzban Patel- Sole Proprietor- in the year 1993, dealer licences came to be transferred in the name of mother of the applicant accused Mrs. Freny M. Patel. Till 1993, father of the applicant accused was solely managing the business but after transfer of the licences in the name of mother of the applicant accused Mrs. Freny M. Patel, the applicant accused was managing the business under Power of Attorney executed by Mrs. Freny M. Patel. It is submitted that the business under four different licences has been inherited by the applicant accused. 3 (II) after arrest, for the first time in the year 1995, Show Cause Notices were issued in the name of the licence-holder i. e. Mrs. Frency M. Patel calling upon to show cause as to why licences issued in her name should not be invoked or cancelled on the ground of alleged violation of the conditions attached with the licences. In response to the query raised by this Court, it has been pointed out that hearing of said SCNs have been concluded way back in the year 1996-1997, but the neither the applicant nor his mother have been communicated about the decision on this issue. So, it can be inferred reasonably that the authorities have yet to take final decision on this issue.

( 4 ) AS on the date of hearing of the present application, the applicant has completed about 7 years and 8 months in the prison as an undertrial prisoner in connection with the present offence and other offences registered against him along with other co-accused. According to the respondent State, the applicant was found involved in 32 different offences including the offence punishable under Section 120-B of IPC R/w other relevant provisions of the IPC and Arms Act. However, it is not a matter of dispute that the applicant has been granted bail in 14 offences and in other 13 offences, he has been acquitted by the competent court. In respect of 4 offences, he has been discharged by the Court after hearing the complainant State of Gujarat. The present bail application is in reference to th