R/SCR.A/1697/2025 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 1697 of 2025 ========================================================== AARIF GULMAMADBHAI MIR & ANR. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. ========================================================== Appearance: MR KRUNAL L SHAHI(6519) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2 NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4,5,6 MR ADITYA JADEJA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 18/09/2025 ORAL ORDER [1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of respondent No.1 – State of Gujarat. [2.0] By way of present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioners have sought for the following relief: “YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to quash and set aside the order dated 09/01/2025 passed by the Ld. Principal District and Sessions Judge (Designated Court GUJCTOC), Rajkot (Annexure-F) rejecting Criminal Misc. Application No.4083/2024 and in turn be pleased to allow the said application and order transfer of the petitioner No.1 from Sabarmati Central Jail, Ahmedabad to Rajkot Central Jail or in Morbi District Jail and transfer the petitioner No.2 from Vadodara Central Jail to Rajkot Central Jail or to Morbi District Jail which would meet the ends of justice;” [3.0] At the outset, it is worth to mention that during the pendency of present petition, petitioner No.2 – Kadar @ Bachchan Ganibhai Kureshi has been enlarged on bail and now, he is no more in judicial custody. Hence, learned advocate for the petitioners does not press R/SCR.A/1697/2025 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2025 the present petition qua petitioner No.2 and hence, present stands disposed of as not pressed qua petitioner No.2. [4.0] Heard learned advocate Mr. Zubin Bharda assisted by learned advocate Mr. Kunal Shah for the petitioners and learned APP for respondent No.1 – State of Gujarat. [5.0] Learned advocate for the petitioners has submitted that present petitioner No.1 is facing trial under the provisions of the Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime Act, 2015 (for short “GUJCTOC Act”) and without any reason he is transferred to Sabarmati Central Jail, Ahmedabad. Sessions case is yet to be commenced and due to this reason, petitioner No.1 and his family has to suFer a lot as his family could not visit the petitioner No.1 regularly and he has requested to transfer him either to Rajkot Central Jail or Morbi District Jail. Further, he has submitted that the petitioner No.1 has also Hled one complaint in connection with which charge-sheet has been Hled which culminated into sessions case and trial is going on in Morbi Sessions Court and to tender his evidence he has to visit Morbi and there is question of safety and security of his life as he is facing threat from the accused persons and there is serious apprehension that the gang of one Hitendrasinh @ Hitubha, who is accused of two murder oFences and has murdered brother of petitioner No.1, and others may assault petitioner No.1. In the said oFence, indiscriminate Hring took place and victim of gunshot injuries and other minor also died. They are sharp-shooters and are yet to be arrested. Hence, petitioner No.1 having fear for his life as he is witness in both the cases registered against the said sharp-shooters. Hence, on this ground also, he has requested to allow the petition and transfer him to either Rajkot Central Jail or Morbi District Jail as already the R/SCR.A/1697/2025 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2025 Superintendent of Sabarmati Central Jail, Ahmedabad has opined positively in favor of petitioner No.1’s jail transfer. [6.0] Learned APP has opposed the petition on the ground that the petitioner No.1 having no absolute right to seek a relief of transfering him to a particular jail. Petitioner No.1 is facing serious allegations and charge for the oFence under the provisions of the GUJCTOC Act and against him 28 oFences are registered. He is the member of organized crime syndicate and working as a gang leader and therefore, if he is transferred to Morbi District Jail or Rajkot Central Jail then the possibility cannot be ruled out that he alongwith inmates of said jails will once again continue illegal activities. Hence, considering the fact that the petitioner No.1 is facing serious charge under the GUCTOC Act and considernig the conduct and connection with other inmates who are detained in Morbi District Jail and Rajkot Central Jail as also his past history and the fact that he is member of organized crime syndicate, he has requested to dismiss the present petition. [7.0] Having heard learned advocates appearing for both the parties and perusing the record, it appears that the petitioner No.1 is arrested by Morbi City ‘A’ Division Police Station in connection with FIR being CR No.11189003212003 of 2021 for the oFences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 120(B), 34, 302, 307, 323, 341 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; sections 25(1-B)(A) and 27 of the Arms Act read with Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and sections 3(1), 3(2) and 3(4) of the GUJCTOC Act. The petitioner No.1 is detained in Sabarmati Central Jail, Ahmedabad on 16.12.2024 and sessions case is yet to be commence. [7.1] The main grievance of the learned advocate for petitioner No.1 is that petitioner No.1 is facing life threat and there is question of his R/SCR.A/1697/2025 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2025 security as he has to attend court proceeding in one case to tender his evidence and second apprehension raised by the learned advocate for the petitioner No.1 is that as petitioner No.1 is detained in Sabarmati Central Jail, he is facing diOculty in contacting his relatives and family members and also the learned advocate for proper brieHng. Perusing the report submitted by the State, it appears that in the jail, there is no threat perception and suOcient care has been taken and frequent jail visits as per the Jail Manual for the relatives and Advocate is allowed. Even, e-jail visits and phone calls aer also allowed and hence, question to not in a position to visit or to remain in contact with family does not arise. Till date, no any untoward incident is reported and there is no life threat to the petitioner and question does not arise to transfer him to Morbi District Jail or Rajkot Central Jail. Even if petitioner No.1 is witness then he may appear through video conferencing before the Court. So far criminal trial which is going on at Rajkot, there also he may appear through video conferencing. Hence, in view of the amendment made in section 306 the BNSS, the evidence through video and audio mode is permissible and as per the amended provisions of the BNSS, under Section 530, trial and proceedings are to be held in electronic mode. Sections 308 and 530 of the BNSS read as under: “308. Evidence to be taken in presence of accused.- Except as otherwise expressly provided, all evidence taken in the course of the trial or other proceeding shall be taken in the presence of the accused, or, when his personal attendance is dispensed with, in the presence of his advocate including through audio-video electronic means at the designated place to be noti@ed by the State Government:Provided that where the evidence of a woman below the age of eighteen years who is alleged to have been subjected to rape or any other sexual oBence, is to be recorded, the Court may take appropriate measures to ensure that such woman is not confronted by the accused while at the same time ensuring the right of cross-examination of the accused. Page 4 of 5 R/SCR.A/1697/2025 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2025 530. Trial and proceedings to be held in electronic mode.- All trials, inquires and proceedings under this Sanhita, including-(i) issuance, service and execution of summons and warrant;(ii) examination of complainant and witnesses;(iii) recording of evidence in inquiries and trials; and(iv) all appellate proceedings or any other proceeding, may be held in electronic mode, by use of electronic communication or use of audio-video electronic means.” Hence, petitioner No.1 is kept in Sabarmati Central Jail, Ahmedabad or Morbi District Jail or Rajkot Central Jail would not make any diFerence. Not only that, apprehension raised by the State that petitioner No.1 is having 28 oFences registered against him which are serious in nature and if he is transferred to Rajkot Central Jail or Morbi District Jail, possibility of petitioner No.1 remaining in constant touch with inmates, who are already detained in Morbi District Jail or Rajkot Central Jail, cannot be ruled out and he may continue his illegal activity. [7.2] Considering the aforesaid fact and the order passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Mustafa Akabarbhai @ Hakubha Khiyani vs. State of Gujarat rendered in Special Criminal Application No.3986 of 2021, request made by the petitioner No.1 to transfer him to Rajkot Central Jail or Morbi District Jail cannot be acceded to. Learned Sessions Judge has not committed any error in rejecting the application being Criminal Misc. Application No.4083/2024 which calls for any interference by this Court. [8.0] In wake of aforesaid discussion, no case is made out to exercise powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and hence, present petition stands dismissed. Rule is hereby discharged. (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 19/09/2025 14:26:02