Gujarat High Court
Ahmedhusen Mirsabmiya Saiyad vs State Of Gujarat on 8 May, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026
undefined
Reserved On : 19/02/2026
Pronounced On : 08/05/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CANCELLATION OF BAIL) NO.
15736 of 2023
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE UTKARSH THAKORBHAI DESAI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
========================================================== AHMEDHUSEN MIRSABMIYA SAIYAD Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
========================================================== Appearance:
MR TEJAS BAROT, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MS RHEA CHOKSHI(10808) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR NISHIT H SHAH(10712) for the Respondent(s) No. 5,6 MR SATYAM Y CHHAYA(3242) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4 MR. D. N. VORA(14575) for the Respondent(s) No. 7,8,9 MS JIRGA JHAVERI, ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE UTKARSH THAKORBHAI DESAI CAV ORDER
1. The applicant herein, who is the original complainant of the offence, which came to be registered Page 1 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined against 8 accused persons by Nandasan Police Station, Mehsana vide FIR being C.R. No. 11206050230260 of 2023 for the offence committed under Sections 395, 365, 452, 384, 344, 295A, 323, 504, 506(2) and 120B of IPC, 1860 as well as Section 135 of the G.P. Act, 1951 has preferred the present application under section 439(2) read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying for cancellaton of anticipatory bail of the respondent nos. 2 to 9, which came to be granted by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge of Mehsana, vide order passed on 09.08.2023 in Criminal Misc. Application No.1140 of 2023.
2. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Tejas Barot assisted by Ms. Rhea Choksi, learned advocate for the applicant, who has reiterated the averments of the application. Mr. Barot has taken the court through the entire gamut of evidence, which has been annexed along with the application. Mr. Barot has drawn the attention of the court towards the affidavit of the Investigation Page 2 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined Officer, which was submitted at the time of the hearing of the anticipatory bail application preferred by the accused persons before the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana. Mr. Barot has also submitted that, one Shreyansh Ashokbhai Gangani, who was also allegedly kept under forceful detention just like the original complainant, had narrated the ordeal in his affidavit dated 26.08.2023. It is pertinent to observe at this juncture that, the typed month and year in the said affidavit is August 2021, and thereafter, a stamp mentioning the date 26.08.2023 has been affixed.
2.1 Mr. Barot has further submitted that, the De- Addiction Center, which was known by the name 'True Change Trust' (for short 'TCT'), which was situated at Bardoli, did not follow the guidelines of the NHRC. Mr. Barot, has forcefully submitted that, whatever the accused did with the applicant under the guise of de- addiction was inhuman and illegal. The learned Sessions Court should not have exercised discretion in favour of Page 3 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined the accused before filing of charge-sheet, and that too, by granting them anticipatory bail. The de-addiction and rehabilitation center acted as detention center in view of the overwhelming evidence against the accused. They did not deserve to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. The order of the learned Sessions Court is not in conformity with the established principles of law governing anticipatory bail. Thus, Mr. Barot has urged the court to allow the application and quash and set aside the order passed by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana in Criminal Misc. Application No.1140 of 2023 on 09.08.2023 granting anticipatory bail to the accused persons.
2.2 Mr. Barot in support of his oral submissions has relied upon the following judgements:
(I) M. Syed Ali Fathima vs. State, Rep. by The Secretary to Government, Home Department & Others rendered by the Madras High Court in Page 4 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined W.P. No. 5058 of 2015 and M.P. No. 1 of 2015 on 17.03.2023;
(II) Ankur Kumar and Another vs. State of U.P. & 4 others rendered by the Allahabad High Court in Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 523 of 2020 on 22.10.2020.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Hriday Buch on behalf of learned advocates Mr. Satyam Y. Chhaya, Mr. Nishit H. Shah and Mr. D.N. Vora for the respondents nos. 2 to 9 - accused. Mr. Buch has at the outset submitted that, the FIR came to be registered against 3 inmates, 4 staff members and one trustee of the said TCT. Mr. Buch has questioned the bonafides of the original complainant, whereby, it was submitted that, the rehabilitation center did not follow the NHRC guidelines and the inmates were inhumanly tortured by submitting that, except the present complaint, no other complaints have been registered or submitted against the said rehabilitation and de-addiction center, which was being run by the TCT. Page 5 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined According to Mr. Buch, there are 22 such centers functioning in Gujarat as of now. The entire premises of the TCT at Bardoli is covered by CCTV cameras and is connected to Hik-Connect App through which the movements of the inmates as well as the ambience inside the premises could be watched. Mr. Buch has submitted that, the original complainant was never kept in confinement. The de-addiction centers function under the 'Alcoholic Anonymous' protocols, which is a 12 steps programme, which includes involuntary or coerce treatments of the victims. Mr. Buch has further submitted that, the original complainant was taken to the de-addiction and rehabilitation center upon the insistence and instructions of his wife, and it was his wife, who had given an undertaking and had also signed the relevant documents of the said institution, for the purpose of her husband's treatment.
3.1 According to Mr. Buch the original complainant wanted to extort money from the TCT. All the offences, Page 6 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined except the offence under Section 395 of IPC, carry punishment upto 7 years and considering the definition of Section 390 of the IPC, Section 395 of the IPC was not applicable, hence the learned Sessions Judge had rightly exercised discretion in favour of the respondents - accused and had granted them anticipatory bail. 3.2 Mr. Buch, learned advocate for the respondents - accused has relied upon the affidavit-in-reply of one Gaurangkumar S Vansia, who is respondent no. 7 - accused no. 6, wherein, in paragraph no. 4 it has been mentioned thus:
"4. Bare perusal of above-referred documents, it would reveal that the Trust is registered under the provision of law and the activity of rehabilitation has been carried out in furtherance to aim and object of the Trust at Bardoli. So far, there has been no complaint on at all. It is clear from the record that in case of the applicant, his wife Sehnazbanu had filled up admission / enrolment form 20.6.2023. This fact is suppressed. This would indicate that the story of abduction of the applicant on that day would be totally falsified."
Page 7 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined 3.3 Mr. Buch, learned advocate for the respondents - accused has further submitted that, the TCT does not have anything personal against the original complainant and this court should not interfere with the order passed by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge of Mehsana, which is factually and legally correct. Thus, Mr. Buch has submitted that, the present application be dismissed.
4. Heard learned APP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the respondent no. 1 - State, who has drawn the attention of the court towards the Investigation Officer's affidavit. According to Ms. Jhaveri, the respondent nos. 2 to 9 - accused nos. 1 to 8 had impersonated as the officials of the Crime Branch, when they had gone to the original complainant's house, and thereafter, had abducted him and eventually had placed him in the detention center, which functioned as so-called rehabilitation and de- addiction center. The original complainant was kept in captivity for 27 days, hence this application should be allowed and the anticipatory bail granted to the Page 8 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined respondents nos. 2 to 9 - accused nos. 1 to 8 be cancelled. Ms. Jhaveri has also submitted that, the trial before the learned Sessions Court at Mehsana in the present case be expedited.
5. In reply, learned Senior Counsel Mr. Barot has submitted that, the learned Sessions Court by completely and outrightly negating the incriminating material against the respondents accused, had granted anticipatory bail to them, which requires interferes from them. There are no exaggerated versions in the present application on part of the original complainant. Mr. Barot has once again vehemently submitted that, rehabilitation and de-addiction centers do not function in the manner in which the TCT center was functioning.
6. The FIR in question came to be lodged by one Ahmedhusen Mirsabmiya Saiyad before the Nandasan Police Station, Mehsana on 27.03.2023 against respondents - accused nos. 2 to 9. Briefly stated, it is the case of the original complainant that, he was at his house Page 9 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined on 20.06.2023, when at around 05.30 am, some unknown people had come and had introduced themselves as officers from the Crime Branch, and thereafter, had forcibly taken him in an Innova Car, which was parked outside. It is further mentioned that, he was beaten inside the car and they had snatched away Rs.5,000/- from his pocket. He was informed that, he was being taken to TCT de-addiction center, and accordingly, he was lodged at the said center.
6.1 The original complainant has mentioned his ordeal during his stay at the said TCT de-addiction center and that, on 17.07.2023, his brother had come to take him away. However, his brother was asked to deposit Rs.1,05,000/- and that, his was the first case where he was being allowed to accompany his family before expiration of 3 months. The original complainant had transferred the said amount into the account of respondent no. 3 accused Bharat Patel, after which, he was permitted to go home. The original complainant had Page 10 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined stated that, in the TCT de-addiction center, he was forced to drink a random concoction which had worsened his health; he was given electric shocks on his genitals and was inflicted severe blows on his hands, legs and abdomen; he was choked and slapped. It is further stated that, because of the severe blows, he was unable to bear the pain, and after his condition having worsened, he was taken to Vasu Hospital at Bardoli, where no treatment was administered. He was called a drug addict at the center and the respondents - accused used to torture him to admit that, he had consumed drugs, and that he was an addict. He was also brutally abused and was made to sit in a chicken like position on a brick facing wall, he was submitted to most unhygienic conditions and when his brother had come to take him back, his signature and thumb impressions were taken on blank papers.
7. On perusing the order passed by the learned 5 th Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana in Criminal Misc. Application No.1140 of 2023 enlarging the respondent Page 11 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined nos. 2 to 9 - accused on anticipatory bail, the learned Judge had observed in his order that, it was the original complainant's wife, who had applied to the said TCT de- addiction center for the applicant's admission/enrollment at the said center and that, the respondent nos. 2 to 9 - accused had taken away the original complainant to TCT de-addiction center, upon instructions from his wife. Learned Sessions Judge had also observed in his order that, a query was posed by the court to the learned advocate for the respondent nos. 2 to 9 - accused as to how the de-addiction center came to know that, the original complainant was indulging in substance abuse, to which, before the learned advocate could reply, the Investigation Officer had informed the court that, he had recorded the statements of the original complainant's wife, who had stated that, the original complainant being addicted to drugs, for the purpose of his treatment, she had located the TCT de-addiction center and had contacted them. Learned Sessions Judge had clearly noted in his order that, the Investigation Officer was Page 12 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined unable to submit any evidence, which would prima facie establish that, the respondents - accused had beaten the original complainant or had committed loot.
8. The Investigation Officer had placed on record his affidavit before the learned Sessions Judge, Mehsana in Criminal Misc. Application No.1140 of 2023, wherein, he had mentioned many facts as regards the FIR, that was filed by the original complainant, and the consequent investigation that was carried out by him. The Investigation Officer in paragraph no. 22 had stated that, during the course of his investigation, it was revealed that, the original complainant had released his property in favour of his younger brother Anees, which had hurt his wife and she being infuriated by such action of the original complainant, had sent the original complainant to the TCT de-addiction center, without his willingness or consent. The respondents - accused have annexed the forms, which were filled up by his wife Shehnaz requesting his enrollment at the said center for de- Page 13 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined addiction. It was Shehnaz, who had also given an undertaking as regards the original complainant's stay at the said de-addiction center. It was Shehnaz, who had also signed a declaration of a therapy contract at the said trust. The discharge form was signed by the original complainant's brother, whereupon, the original complainant had also put his thumb mark, wherein, it was mentioned that the original complainant was in a good state of mind and physically fit, and did not bear any injury marks on his body, and that the original complainant's brother had no complaints and issues against the TCT and the staff of the said center.
9. The respondent nos. 2 to 9 - accused nos. 1 to 8 have also placed on record the photographs of the ambience of the premises of the trust. On perusing the same, it does not appear that, the applicant herein, was miserably treated and physically and mentally abused.
10. It is true that, the respondents accused may have Page 14 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined introduced themselves as officers from the Crime Branch, however, by saying so, they had only coerced the original complainant so as to take him to the de-addiction center. It is not the case of the prosecution that, the original complainant was either kidnapped or forcibly taken away from his house by the respondents - accused to the de- addiction center, rather, from the investigation papers produced by either sides, and more particularly, the affidavit of the Investigation Officer filed before the concerned Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Misc. Application No.1140 of 2023, it was the wife of the original complainant, who had sent him to the said de- addiction center. The statement of Shehnaz, the wife of the original complainant has been recorded by the Investigation Officer, wherein, she had clearly and unequivocally submitted that, it was she, who had applied to the de-addiction center TCT at Bardoli, for the treatment of her husband i.e. the original complainant, as he was addicted to drugs.
Page 15 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined 10.1 If this be the case, then, the only allegation that would remain against the respondent nos. 2 to 9 - accused nos. 1 to 8 would be about ill-treating the original complainant by them, who were associated with the said TCT de-addiction center, for which, the original complainant is required to approach the concerned authority of the concerned district and seek redressal of his grievances.
11. This court is baffled about the fact that, though it was the wife of the original complainant, who had sent the original complainant to the TCT de-addiction center, there is not a whisper by him in the entire FIR, as regards the said fact. Also, if the respondents accused are alleged to have committed the offence against the original complainant, his wife was the main perpetrator of the crime, because, once again at the cost of repetition, and also having been revealed during the investigation that, it was she, who had approached the TCT de-addiction center and not otherwise. There does not appear to be Page 16 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined any iota of evidence that, the respondents - accused of their own accord had come to the original complainant's house, and had kidnapped him, and thereafter, had wrongfully confined him at the trust premises at Bardoli and only after his brother being forced to pay the amount of Rs.1,05,000/-, he was permitted to go home. Learned advocate Mr. Buch for the respondents accused has submitted that, the original complainant wanted to recover the amount of Rs.1,05,000/-, which was paid by his brother to the de-addiction center, and as such, he had lodged the false FIR after one week after coming home. It would be fruitful to observe that the said FIR does not mention the reasons of delay.
12. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Barot has questioned the functioning of the TCT de-addiction center, however, in the opinion of this court, this is not the forum to raise such a grievance.
13. The affidavit of the other inmate Shreyansh Page 17 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined Ashokbhai Gangani, upon which learned Senior Advocate Mr. Barot has relied, in support of his application, has stated about the ill-treatment, which was meted out to him in the said de-addiction center. This witness, in his affidavit, amongst other allegations against the TCT de- addiction center had stated that, people who had trouble with relatives and family members pertaining to property or other finances or were facing other familial disputes or people who were in heavy debt or were fleeing from the law, were sent to this rehabilitation center, and were only allowed to leave, when either the debt was settled, property was given to the family member with whom the dispute was going on, or the demand of money was fulfilled by the person stuck in the said rehab center. However, it is not the case of the prosecution that, while the original complainant was physically and mentally harassed at the said de-addiction center, unable to bear the said humiliation and ordeal, he had given the property to his wife.
Page 18 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined
14. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Barot, while relying upon the judgement of the Madras High Court in the case of M. Syed Ali Fathima (supra) has drawn the attention of this court towards the observation of the said High Court in paragraph no. 8, which reads as under:
"8.Such rehabilitation or de-addiction centres cannot be run by any individuals without obtaining a proper permission and license from the competent authorities. In this regard, the social welfare officer is bound to initiate appropriate action. Periodical inspection of such institutions are essential in order to safeguard the public interest. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the centre has obtained license from the Institute of Mental Health, Kilpauk, and therefore, its Director is duty bound to conduct inspection periodically in order to find out the administrative affairs of the centres."
15. The original complainant's grievance against the respondents accused is about they having impersonated as police personnel, and thereafter, having kidnapped him and having taken him to TCT, where he was confined for 27 days and being severely physically and mentally abused by them. In the light of the aforesaid observation Page 19 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined of the Madras High Court, the original complainant has to seek redressal of his grievance from the concerned authority, who is administratively the supervising authority, on behalf of the State Government.
16. In the event, this does not appear to be a case, wherein, the respondents - accused upon having committed a crime were considered for anticipatory bail. Rather, this is a case where the original complainant's own wife had sent him to the said TCT de-addiction center, for which, the respondents - accused may have resorted to unnatural ways so as to take him from his residence to the center. There also does not appear to be any breach of bail conditions, being committed by them. Thus, the order of the learned Sessions Judge of Mehsana, granting anticipatory bail to the respondents - accused does not appear to be either perverse, or illegal, or erroneous and as such, does not require any interference from this court.
Page 20 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15736/2023 CAV ORDER DATED: 08/05/2026 undefined
17. Thus, this court is not inclined to exercise discretion in favour of the original complainant, and accordingly, the present application is rejected.
(UTKARSH THAKORBHAI DESAI, J) DIVYA Page 21 of 21 Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Tue May 12 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 12 22:00:51 IST 2026