Supreme Court of India was dealing with the petition challenging the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Gujarat dated 5th January, 2022, thereby rejecting the application filed by the petitioner/applicant for grant of bail.
Appellant’s Contention:
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that for invoking the provisions of the Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime Act, 2015 which is analogous with the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999, two requirements have to be satisfied. The first one is that an activity undertaken is either singly or jointly as a member of an organized crime syndicate or on behalf of such a crime syndicate. The second one is that in respect of such an activity, more than one charge-sheet must have been filed in the preceding period of last 10 years.
He submitted that in the present case, the second requirement is not satisfied. In the Chart wherein all the crimes registered against the petitioner/applicant have been listed, it could be seen that only FIR is in respect of an activity committed by two members of the syndicate. He therefore submitted that requirement of filing of more than one chargesheets is not satisfied in the present case.
Respondent’s Contention:
Learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that all the offences alleged in the FIRs which are given in the Chart, are directly or indirectly committed for the benefit of the crime syndicate of which the petitioner/applicant is a member. She relied on the judgment of SC in the case of Prasad Shrikant Purohit vs. State of Maharashtra.
SC’s Observations:
After hearing both the sides SC stated that undisputedly, in the present case only one charge-sheet was filed in respect of an activity which can be said to have been undertaken by the petitioner/applicant as a member of an organised crime syndicate on behalf of such syndicate.
For invoking the provisions of the GCTOC Act, SC gave the following conditions to be fulfilled:
(i) that such an activity should be prohibited by law for the time being in force;
(ii) that such an activity is a cognizable offence punishable with imprisonment of three years or more;
(iii) that such an activity is undertaken either singly or jointly, as a member of an organised crime syndicate or on behalf of such syndicate;
(iv) that in respect of such an activity more than one charge-sheet must have been filed before a competent Court; and
(v) that the charge-sheet must have been filed within a preceding period of ten years; and
(vi) that the Courts have taken cognizance of such offences.
Bench noted “undisputedly, in the present case only one charge-sheet was filed in respect of an activity which can be said to have been undertaken by the petitioner/applicant as a member of an organised crime syndicate on behalf of such syndicate.”
SC Held:
After evaluating submissions made by both the parties the SC held that “Taking into consideration this aspect of the matter and further that the petitioner/applicant has already been directed to be released on bail in respect of crime registered at Serial Nos. 1 to 5, we are inclined to allow the present Special Leave petition. The petitioner/applicant is, therefore, directed to be released on bail on such terms and conditions as found appropriate by the Trial Court.”
Case Title: Mohamad Iliyas Mohamad Bilal Kapadiya v. The State of Gujarat
Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.R. Gavai and Hon'ble Ms. Justice Hima Kohli
Citation: Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 1815/2022
Decided on: 30th May, 2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com:
Picture Source :
