[Cites 12, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

State Of Gujarat vs Mohammad Husain @ Munna Tarbuch Zakir ... on 4 May, 2026

                                                                                                         NEUTRAL CITATION




                            R/CR.MA/3238/2022                             CAV ORDER DATED: 04/05/2026

                                                                                                         undefined




                                                                      Reserved On   : 05/03/2026
                                                                      Pronounced On : 04/05/2026

                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                         R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CANCELLATION OF BAIL) NO.
                                                 3238 of 2022


                       FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


                       HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE UTKARSH THAKORBHAI DESAI

                       ==========================================================

                                    Approved for Reporting              Yes          No
                                                                                    

========================================================== STATE OF GUJARAT Versus MOHAMMAD HUSAIN @ MUNNA TARBUCH ZAKIR HUSSAIN SHEIKH ========================================================== Appearance:

MR SOAHAM JOSHI, ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Applicant(s) No.

==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE UTKARSH THAKORBHAI DESAI

CAV ORDER

1. The applicant - State of Gujarat has preferred the

present application against the respondent - accused,

praying for cancellation of bail under Section 439(2) of

the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/3238/2022 CAV ORDER DATED: 04/05/2026

undefined

2. The offence came to be registered against the

respondent - accused by DCB Police Station, Vadodara

vide I-C.R. No. 11196010210001 of 2021 for the offence

punishable under Sections 3(1)(i) & (ii), 3(2), 3(4) and

3(5) of the Gujarat Control Terrorism and Organized

Crime Act, 2015.

3. The respondent - accused had preferred regular bail

application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 before the learned Sessions and Special

Judge of Vadodara vide Criminal Misc. Application No.

2192 of 2021, which came to be allowed by the learned

Sessions and Special Judge of Vadodara on 07.10.2021

subject to conditions. The applicant - State has

challenged the said order by way of this application.

4. The applicant State by way of this application has

submitted that, the order of the learned Sessions and

Special Judge of Vadodara is illegal, improper and against

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/3238/2022 CAV ORDER DATED: 04/05/2026

undefined

the provisions of law and against criminal jurisdiction. It

is further mentioned that, the learned Sessions and

Special Judge ought to have considered that, there are 5

offences registered against the respondent - accused,

which are serious in nature and which relate to offences

against the body. It is also mentioned that, the learned

Sessions and Special Judge of Vadodara ought to have

considered the confessional statement of the accused,

which came to be recorded under Section 16 of the

GUJCTOC Act, by the Investigation Officer, and, the

antecedents against the respondent accused being

serious in nature.

4.1 Learned APP Mr. Soaham Joshi has submitted that,

the respondent accused having been enlarged on bail by

the learned Sessions and Special Judge, Vadodara was

subject to conditions wherein, condition no. (a) was

about the respondent accused not to take undue

advantage or misuse liberty, condition no. (c) was

about the respondent accused not indulging himself

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/3238/2022 CAV ORDER DATED: 04/05/2026

undefined

in identical or any other offence. It is pertinent to

observe that, the learned Sessions and Special Judge of

Vadodara by way of paragraph no. 3 in the operative part

of the order had observed that, "breach of any

condition shall invite cancellation of bail

invariably."

4.2 Learned APP Mr. Joshi has drawn the attention of

the court to the fact that, one more FIR came to be

registered against the applicant on 08.08.2025 i.e. after

he was released on bail by the learned Sessions Judge

and Special Judge of Vadodara, by the Panigate Police

Station wherein, he was named as accused no. 1. The

said FIR was registered vide Part A I- C.R. No.

11196017250371 of 2025, for the offences alleged to

have been committed under Sections 115(2), 296(b),

351(3), 54 of BNS, 2023 and Section 135 of G.P. Act.

4.3 Thus, learned APP has submitted that the

respondent - accused had committed a clear and

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/3238/2022 CAV ORDER DATED: 04/05/2026

undefined

unequivocal breach of two of the above mentioned bail

conditions, and hence, has invited cancellation of bail.

5. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgement of Ms. P. v.

The State of Madhya Pradesh and another reported in

2022 LiveLaw (SC) 448 has discussed the circumstances

where bail granted to the accused under Section 439(1) of

the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 can be cancelled. The

said paras are reproduced as under:

"24. As can be discerned from the above decisions, for cancelling bail once granted, the Court must consider whether any supervening circumstances have arisen or the conduct of the accused post grant of bail demonstrates that it is no longer conducive to a fair trial to permit him to retain his freedom by enjoying the concession of bail during trial. To put it differently, in ordinary circumstances, this Court would be loath to interfere with an order passed by the Court below granting bail but if such an order is found to be illegal or perverse or premised on material that is irrelevant, then such an order is susceptible to scrutiny and interference by the Appellate Court. Some of the circumstances where bail granted to the accused under Section 439 (1) of the Cr.P.C. can be cancelled are enumerated below: -

a) If he misuses his liberty by indulging in similar/other criminal activity;

b) If he interferes with the course of investigation;

c) If he attempts to tamper with the evidence;

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/3238/2022 CAV ORDER DATED: 04/05/2026

undefined

d) If he attempts to influence/threaten the witnesses;

e) If he evades or attempts to evade court proceedings;

f) If he indulges in activities which would hamper smooth investigation;

g) If he is likely to flee from the country;

h) If he attempts to make himself scarce by going underground and/or becoming unavailable to the investigating agency;

i) If he attempts to place himself beyond the reach of his surety.

j) If any facts may emerge after the grant of bail which are considered unconducive to a fair trial.

We may clarify that the aforesaid list is only illustrative in nature and not exhaustive.

25. Keeping the aforesaid parameters to be borne in mind when dealing with a petition where not only has the order granting bail been assailed on the ground of perversity and illegality, supervening circumstances have been pleaded by the appellant that justify interference by this Court, we may now proceed to deal with the instant case."

6. This court is in agreement with the submission of learned

APP that, the applicant was subsequently involved in an

offence committed under Sections 115(2), 296(b), 351(3),

54 of BNS, 2023 and Section 135 of G.P. Act, for which,

the FIR came to be registered by Panigate Police Station

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/3238/2022 CAV ORDER DATED: 04/05/2026

undefined

vide Part A I- C.R. No. 11196017250371 of 2025. The

learned APP has also placed on record the copy of the said

FIR, wherein, it is mentioned that, the respondent - accused

along with other persons, picked up a fight with