JUDGMENT :

Nikhil S. Kariel, J.

1. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Asim Pandya with learned Advocate Mr. M.R. Molvi for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 535 of 2022, learned Senior Advocate Mr. I.H. Syed with learned Advocates Mr. M.R. Molvi, Mr. Aniq A. Kadri, and Mr. Muhammad Quasim Vora for the appellants in Criminal Appeal Nos. 554 of 2022, 598 of 2022, 616 of 2022, 639 of 2022, 645 of 2022 and 706 of 2022, learned Public Prosecutor Mr. Mitesh Amin with learned APP Mr. L.B. Dabhi for the respondent-State and learned Senior Advocate Mr. J.M. Panchal with learned Advocate Mr. Romil L. Kodekar for the respondent No. 2-first informant.

2. By way of these appeals, under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 read with Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, the appellants pray for being released on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11199003211359 of 2021 registered on 15.11.2021 with the Amod Police Station, District Bharuch, for the offences punishable under Sections, 120(B), 153(B)(C), 153(A)(1), 295(A), 506(2), 466, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “the IPC”) under Sections 4, 5 and 4(C) of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003 (for short “the Act”) under Sections 3(2)(v-a) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short “Atrocities Act”) and under section 84 of the Information Technology Act.

3. Learned Senior Advocates Mr. Asim Pandya and Mr. I.H. Syed appearing on behalf of the respective appellants would submit that the allegations against the appellants pertain to a period from the year 2006 onwards and whereas the FIR has been registered in the month of November, 2021. Learned Senior Advocates would submit that the allegations against the present appellants pertain to commission of offences with regard to giving allurement for conversion of various persons including the first informant from one religion to another. Learned Senior Advocates would submit that though the incidents as alleged in the FIR relate to a period from 2006 onwards and whereas such allegations have been made by the first informant as if he had witnessed all the incidents, the first informant had himself converted only in the year 2018.

3.1 Learned Senior Advocates would further submit that so far as the appellants in Criminal Appeal Nos. 535 of 2022, 554 of 2022, 598 of 2022, 616 of 2022, and 639 of 2022 are concerned, allegations against them are for offence punishable under Section 4 of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003, which states with regard to punishment for contravention of Section 3 of the Act, more particularly when a person belongs to the Scheduled Tribes. Learned Senior Advocates would further submit that maximum punishment envisaged for offence punishable under Section 3, as per Section 4 of the Act, is for a period of four years. Learned Senior Advocates would further submit that while the Investigating Officer has filed the charge-sheet, there is no allegation found against the appellants of the said appeals which would correspond to an offence under Section 4(C) of the Act, that is, when a institution or an organization contravening the provisions of Section 3 of the Act, which carries a maximum punishment for ten years. It is further submitted that except for offences punishable under Sections 466, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, all other offences are punishable with a maximum imprisonment for three years. It is further submitted that insofar as offence of forgery as alleged, the same is with regard to allegation that the Adhar Cards and some other receipts had been forged. It is submitted in this regard that there is no material in the charge-sheet which would show that by the alleged forgery any undue advantage had been conferred. Learned Senior Advocates would further submit that insofar as the allegation of commission of offence under the Atroc