Facts
The applicant filed a successive regular bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, regarding FIR No. 11208044202185/2020 involving the Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organized Crime (GUJCTOC) Act
Source reference: p. 1The applicant was arrested on December 26, 2020, and has remained in judicial custody for over five years
Source reference: p. 2Although 108 witnesses were cited in the charge-sheet, only one has been examined to date
Source reference: p. 2The applicant contended that out of four past offences used to invoke GUJCTOC, he was acquitted in three and one was quashed
Source reference: p. 2The State opposed bail, citing the applicant's past conduct, including absconding for 218 days while on temporary bail in a murder case
Source reference: p. 3Issues
1. Whether the prolonged period of incarceration (over five years) and the slow pace of trial justify the grant of regular bail despite the gravity of charges under the GUJCTOC Act
Source reference: p. 42. Whether the applicant is entitled to bail on the grounds of parity, given that the alleged gang leader and other co-accused have been released
Source reference: p. 4Law Applied
The court primarily applied Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 regarding bail
Source reference: p. 1It adhered to the principles established in *Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation* [2012] 1 SCC 40, which emphasizes that the objective of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused at trial and that deprivation of liberty pending trial should not be used as a form of "pre-trial conviction"
Source reference: p. 5The court also assessed the stringent requirements of the GUJCTOC Act regarding organized crime syndicates
Source reference: p. 2Reasoning
The court reasoned that while the offences are grave, the applicant's five-year incarceration with only one of 108 witnesses examined suggests the trial will not conclude in a reasonable timeframe
Source reference: p. 4It observed that continuing detention under such circumstances violates the principle against pre-trial punishment
Source reference: p. 2Regarding the applicant's criminal history, the court noted that the applicant had already been acquitted in the murder case where he previously jumped bail, and the primary offences used to invoke GUJCTOC had resulted in acquittals or quashing
Source reference: p. 2, 4Furthermore, the court found that the "gang leader" and most co-accused were already at liberty, making the applicant's continued detention discriminatory
Source reference: p. 4The court determined that the risk of the applicant fleeing or meddling with evidence could be mitigated through stringent conditions rather than continued imprisonment
Source reference: p. 5Holding
The court allowed the application and ordered the applicant’s release on regular bail upon executing a personal bond of Rs. 15,000
The holding established that a prolonged delay in trial (5+ years) outweighs the rigor of special statutes like GUJCTOC when most co-accused are on bail and past predicate offences resulted in acquittals
Source reference: p. 4Relief was granted subject to conditions: the applicant must surrender his passport, mark his presence at the police station fortnightly, and is prohibited from entering Saurashtra or Ahmedabad District limits until the trial concludes
Source reference: p. 5-6Original Court PDF
Shahrukh @Raja Aallarakhabhai Juneja v. State of Gujarat [R/Criminal Misc. Application No. 2289 of 2026]
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in