IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 2558 of 2024 ==========================================================

MANSANGBHAI SAJABHA SUMANIYA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR H.B. CHAMPAWAT, ADVOCATE FOR MR KARTIKSINH H CHAMPAVAT(12148) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR DHAWAN JAYSWAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI Date : 08/02/2024

ORAL ORDER

1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent-State.

2. The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with C.R. No. 11185005220336 of 2022 registered with the Mithapur Police Station, District Devbhoomi Dwarka (Rajkot) for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 323, 324, 325, 326, 143, 147, 149, 504, 506(2), 427, 120(B), 384, 385, 387, 506(1) of the Indian Penal Code, section 3(1) 3(2),3(3), 3(4) and 3(5) of the Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organized Crime Act, 2015 and Section 135 of the G.P. Act.

3. Learned advocate Mr. Champawat appearing on behalf of the applicant has submitted that the so called incident has occurred on 05.05.2022 and FIR was registered on 06.05.2022. The applicant was arrested on 26.06.2022, since then he is in judicial custody. It is also submitted that the investigation is already completed and the present application is filed after submission of the charge-sheet. It is further submitted that initially the FIR was registered against five known persons and two-three unknown persons and the name of the present applicant was not mentioned and thereafter report for addition of section was submitted by the concerned officer and at relevant point of time also, specific role and name of the present applicant was not disclosed and thereafter once again application under Section 120B was also submitted before the concerned Magistrate and even in that application, the name of the applicant was not mentioned, however subsequently, the applicant is sought to be implicated in the present case on the basis of the statement of the co-accused, thereafter provision of GUJCTOC Act was invoked at the time of submission of charge sheet and at relevant point of time the concerned Police officer has put reliance upon the total eight offences registered against the present applicant. Learned advocate submitted that the applicant has produced copies of the orders of all eight offences, wherein the applicant has already been acquitted by the concerned Court. It is further submitted that only one offence is registered after invocation of the provisions, however in that offence, the applicant has been acquitted by the concerned Court. It is further submits that identically situated person, whose role is higher than the present applicant has already been considered by this Court. Considering the principle of law of parity and the aforesaid facts, the present applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable terms and conditions.

4. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed the present bail application. It is submitted that the role of the present applicant is clearly spelt out from the body of the compilation of the charge sheet papers. Learned APP submitted that the applicant was in contact with other accused persons and number of offences are registered against the present applicant. Learned APP has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Zakir Abdul Mirajkar v. the State of Maharashtra & Ors, rendered in Criminal Appeal No.1125 of 2022, and submitted in the said case, it has been specifically observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that, ‘it is settled law that more than one charge sheet is required to be filed in respect of the organized crime syndicate and not in respect of each pe