R/CR.MA/6887/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/06/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 6887 of 2025 ========================================================== DEV RAJUBHAI SOLANKI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance: MR VIRAT G POPAT(3710) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS SHIVANGI D MADHAD(13116) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 27/06/2025 ORAL ORDER [1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent- State. [2.0] The present successive application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.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 Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organized Crimes Act, 2015 (for short “GUJCTOC Act”) and under Sections 308(2), 308(3), 308(4), 351(2), 351(3), 127(1), 137(2), 115(2) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”). [3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence. Further, the charge-sheet is filed and at the time of R/CR.MA/6887/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/06/2025 commission of offence the applicant was aged 19 years and has been arrested on 03.08.2024. The charge is yet to be framed and trial is protracted. Merely because the father of the applicant is having past antecedents, present applicant is falsely enroped in the offence though he is not the member of the organized crime syndicate. As per the case of prosecution, in last 10 years only two offences are registered against the present applicant and is enroped on the ground that against one boot-legger he lodged a complaint for the offence under Section 307 of the IPC and as a part of preventive measure to maintain peace and tranquility present applicant is implicated in the offence under the GUJCTOC Act so as to prevent the applicant from committing any further offence. However, to maintain peace and order, there are other modes available for which complaint is not required to be registered. Further, the mother of the applicant who was having four past antecedents has been enlarged on bail. Applicant is ready and willing to join the investigation and no any such serious offence is registered against the applicant and there is not an iota of evidence which suggests that the present applicant is continuously engaged in any unlawful activity. Even otherwise, now the investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed and nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the present applicant. The applicant is behind the bars since more than one year and long incarceration of applicant will seriously prejudice the interest of his family and yet the charge is not framed. He therefore submits that, considering the nature of the offence and delay in trial, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions. Page 2 of 7 R/CR.MA/6887/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/06/2025 [4.0] Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed the present application and requested to dismiss the present application for regular bail on the ground that applicant is a member of unlawful assembly and organized crime syndicate and is running the syndicate against which there are 26 offences registered and father of the applicant is the head of the said syndicate and in connivance and abetment to his father, the applicant has committed the offence. Further, in the years 2022 and 2023, there are two offences registered against the applicant. One similarly situated co-accused Nusrat’s bail application is dismissed. Further, after withdrawal of earlier bail application on 29.10.2024 before this Court, there is no change in circumstance. She has therefore requested to dismiss the present application. [5.0] I have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties at length. [6.0] Perusing the investigation papers it appears that the applicant is facing charge under the provisions of the GUJCTOC Act and is having two offences registered against him however, at the same time the Court has to consider that applicant is behind the bars since 03.08.2024 and till date charge is not framed and prosecution has to examine as many as 88 witnesses in order to prove the case against the present applicant. Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will take its own time and therefore, considering the right to speedy justice as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In howsoever serious offence or under the special Act an accused is involved, on the ground of delay in trial, the accused is entitled to be released on R/CR.MA/6887/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/06/2025 bail without further discussing anything on merits, mainly on the ground of delay in trial, present application deserves consideration. [6.1] Further, perusing the record it appears that earlier bail application of the present applicant was withdrawn on 29.10.2024 and thereafter, charge-sheet is filed and applicant is in custody since 03.08.2024. The provisions of the GUJCTOC Act are invoked against the present applicant by citing two offences being (1) CR No.11203023220828 of 2022 registered against the applicant with Junagadh ‘A’ Division Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 323, 324, 325, 397, 427, 506(2) of the IPC and section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and (2) CR No.11203023230956 of 2023 registered with Junagadh ‘A’ Division Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 114, 307, 323, 324, 325, 326, 506(2) of the IPC and section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act, which was filed at the instance of Siddhrajsinh Solanki and against the syndicate there are 26 offences registered. The complaint filed at the instance of Siddhrajsinh Solanki was filed as father of the applicant had threatened and beaten up the said Siddhrajsinh Solanki. The said syndicate is headed by the father of the present applicant and because of the said reason, present applicant appears to have been arraigned in the present offence though there is no any material produced on record which suggests that present applicant was since long continuously involved in any unlawful activity or being the member of syndicate and merely R/CR.MA/6887/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/06/2025 because he is having blood relationship with person who is father of present applicant and running the syndicate is not a ground to invoke the provisions of the GUJCTOC Act. It is true that to invoke provisions of the GUJCTOC Act, offence against syndicate is required to be considered but in absence of any other material to show the involvement of the present applicant as a member of syndicate and indulged in continuous unlawful activity, present application deserves consideration. Even, learned APP has failed to show any such material. [6.2] Similarly situated co-accused Hansaben Solanki i.e. the mother of the present applicant against whom there are four antecedents has been considered on 10.03.2025 by order passed in CR.MA No.4957/2025. It appears that allegation against the applicant is that he had given threat to the witness namely Siddhrajsinh Solanki for settling the dispute and except this there is no any other role attributed to the present applicant. [7.0] This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012]1 SCC 40 as well as in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1978)1 SCC 240. Obviously, the conclusion of trial will take time and keeping the accused behind the bars is nothing but amounts to pre- trial conviction and therefore, considering the celebrated principle of bail jurisprudence is that “bail is a rule and jail is exception” as well as the concept of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of R/CR.MA/6887/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/06/2025 the Constitution of India, present application deserves consideration. [8.0] In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the FIR, without discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11203023240734 of 2024 registered with ’A’ Division Police Station, District Junagadh on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall; (a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty; (b) not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution & shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and shall not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police; (c) surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a week; (d) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Trial Court concerned; (e) mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in a month till the trial I over between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.; (f) furnish Aadhar Card number, contact number, e-mail ID (if any) and the present address of his residence to the R/CR.MA/6887/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/06/2025 Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the same without prior permission of Trial Court; (g) not to indulge in any illegal activity or any offence and not to directly or indirectly contact any of the witness failing which concerned trial Court shall have liberty to issue warrant and cancel the bail of the applicant; [9.0] The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. [10.0] Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law. [11.0] At the trial, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature qua the evidence at this stage made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail. [13.0] Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.) Ajay Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: AJAY CHANDRAN MENON(HC00939), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 27/06/2025 18:30:44