SAJIDKHAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for regular bail in connection with the First Information Report being C.R. No.11211058210264 of 2021 registered with Bajana Police Station, Surendranagar for the offences punishable under Ss. 354A(1) , 323 , 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sec. 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.

(2.) Learned Advocate for the applicant submitted that the bail of the applicant granted on 1/12/2021 in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.924 of 2021 came to be cancelled suo motu by the learned Judge by taking the applicant in custody on 27/7/2022 on the ground that there was breach of conditions of bail as per the order passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.944 of 2021. It is submitted that after release of the applicant in connection with the offences registered with the present First Information Report, i.e. C.R. No.11211058210264 of 2021 registered with Bajana Police Station, Surendranagar for the offences punishable under Ss. 354A(1) , 323 , 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sec. 12 of POCSO Act, 2012, a case was registered against the applicant on 5/2/2022 as C.R. No.11211058220018 of 2022 with Bajana Police Station for the offences punishable under Ss. 364A , 323 , 504 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code and under Ss. 25(1) , 25 (1-b)(a) of the Arms Act and under Sec. 135 of the Gujarat Police Act. It is submitted that the applicant was granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dtd. 13/7/2022 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.10325 of 2022 and thus, the suo motu exercise of powers by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Dhrangadhra by way of cancellation of bail already granted is bad in law, since the applicant was taken into custody on 27/4/2022 and thereafter, was granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on merits on 13/7/2022 for the offences which were registered against him. Thereafter, an application was moved on 19/7/2022, and the same came to be rejected stating that there was breach of conditions, which according to the learned Judge was the institution of the second offences. It is further submitted that while the order of bail was passed on 13/7/2022, the fact of the applicant's arrest on 27/4/2022 was known to the Court and inspite of that, the Co-ordinate Bench had granted bail though the registration of the offences was made known to the Court. It is also submitted that the Co-ordinate Bench had never considered it as a breach of conditions to reject the prayer for grant of bail and that fact ought to be kept in mind by the learned Special Judge while considering the prayer for grant of bail. Further, it is submitted that there were no cogent or overwhelming circumstances which necessitated the cancellation of bail. It is also submitted that the arrest was made on 27/4/2022 which is illegal since no order of cancellation of bail was passed and without any order of cancellation of bail, the applicant was arrested on 27/4/2022 and was shown to be taken into judicial custody without any order and hence, such arrest is an illegal detention of the applicant and the suo motu act of the learned Judge to arrest the applicant without any observation on the judicial side and the order passed for cancellation of bail is against the provisions of law.

(3.) Learned Advocate for the applicant has relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dolat Ram vs State Of Haryana reported in 1995 SCC 1 349 to submit that the rejection of bail in any case of bail at the initial stage and/or the cancellation of bail so granted have to be considered and dealt with on a different basis. It is submitted that there should exist major and overwhelming circumstances for an order directing the cancellation of bail already granted while in this case, it is submitted that without any order of cancellation of bail, the applicant was taken into judicial custody. It was, therefore, prayed that the present application may be allowed and the applicant herein may be released on regular bail.