The court ruled that serious allegations and the applicant's extensive criminal history preclude the grant of bail, despite claims of parity with co-accused.

ORDER :

1. This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita for regular bail in connection with F.I.R. No.11203023240734 of 2024 registered with ‘A’ Division Police Station, District Junagadh, for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1), (ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of the GUJCTOC Act.

2. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the investigation is over and the Charge-sheet is filed. The applicant has been arrested in connection with the present offence on 20.10.2024 and since then, he is in custody. He has further submitted that the other co-accused who are similarly situated to the present applicant has been considered for grant of bail by this Court and therefore, on the ground of parity, the applicant is entitled to grant the bail. He has further submitted that the provisions of GUJCTOC Act are not applicable against the present applicant as the applicant is not member of any syndicate which is involved in commission of any illegal activities. He has further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present offence. He has, therefore, submitted that considering the nature of offence and role attributed to the applicant, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.

3. The learned APP appearing for the respondent State has vehemently submitted that the applicant had actively involved in commission of offence in question. There are several offences registered against the present applicant prior to commencement of GUJCTOC Act and after commencement of GUJCTOC Act and the offences registered against the present applicant are serious in nature. He has further submitted that in some of the offences, the co-accused are also common. Thus, there is strong prima facie case against the present applicant for commission of offence in question. Learned APP has, further submitted that the allegations against the applicant, are serious in nature and looking to the facts as well as the allegations made against the applicant, no discretion should be exercised.

4. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the documents produced on record. The investigation is over and Charge-sheet is filed.

5. The applicant has been booked for the offence punishable under the provisions of GUJCTOC Act on the basis of past antecedents of the present applicant. There are as many as seven other antecedents registered against the present applicant. Out of them, several antecedents are prior to commencement of GUJCTOC Act and other offences are after commencement of GUJCTOC Act. It is the case on the part of the present applicant that the other co-accused namely, Hansaben W/o Rajeshbhai @ Rajubhai Solanki has been considered for grant of bail by this Court vide order dated 10.03.2025 and therefore, parity is sought with the said co-accused.

6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has drawn attention of this Court to the statement of Dilipbhai Babubhai Somani, dated 07.10.2024, who in his statement categorically stated that he was abducted by the other co-accused and was also threatened for dire consequences, if he did not withdraw the complainant lodged by him against the present applicant and also thereafter, intercepted the said complainant and also threatened of dire consequences. The record also indicates that the applicant had played an active role in commission of offence and there are seven other antecedents serious in nature under the provisions of Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered against the present applicant.

7. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to use its judicial discretion in favour of the applicant. The application is dismissed.