Gujarat High Court
Shirinbanu @ Sapna W/O Sahil Husain ... vs State Of Gujarat on 25 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/12559/2025 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 12559 of 2025
================================================================
SHIRINBANU @ SAPNA W/O SAHIL HUSAIN SIYED @ RAJ JAYRAMDAS
RAYSINGHANIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR. RASHESH PATEL for MR. SURAJ A SHUKLA(7185) for the Applicant.
MS. ASMITA PATEL, APP for the Respondent.
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS
Date : 25/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. RULE. Learned APP Ms.Asmita Patel waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent-State.
2. The present application has been preferred under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by the present applicant-accused seeking regular bail in connection with the F.I.R. being I-CR No.11199010241271 of 2024 registered with the A-Division Police Station, Bharuch, for the offences punishable under Sections 4(3) and 5(c) of the Gujarat Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 2020.
Page 1 of 10 Uploaded by M.A. SAIYED(HC00172) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 23:49:17 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12559/2025 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2025 undefined
3. The case of the prosecution, as per the FIR, is that the complainant is the owner of the property being Building No.09 bearing Survey No.132/2 paiki B/P/9 admeasuring 160 sq.meters situated at Chistiya Township, Dahej Bypass Road, Sherpura Village, Bharuch, and he had purchased the said property from the original owners vide registered sale-deed no.3843 dated 26.09.2000, and since then he is residing in the said property with his family. It is further the case of the prosecution, as per the FIR, that in December 2020, the present applicant and her husband, namely, Sahil Husain Saiyed had approached the complainant's son, namely, Fazal Rehman Abdul Aziz Patel, and told him that they both are doctors and belong to Saiyed community, and since the registration process of the sale-deed of the house they have purchased is going on, they need a house on rent for 15 days. It is alleged that in such circumstances, on humanitarian ground, the complainant had provided the upper floor of his house to the applicant and her husband to stay for 15 days.
4. However, it is alleged that on completion of 15 days' period, when the complainant had asked the applicant to vacate the house, she had asked for some more time to vacate citing the Page 2 of 10 Uploaded by M.A. SAIYED(HC00172) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 23:49:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12559/2025 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2025 undefined reason that the process of registration of the sale-deed is still going on. Therefore, at that time, the complainant had allowed them to stay, but after one month, when the complainant again asked them to vacate the house, they refused to vacate and threatened them of dire consequences. Ultimately, on 22.07.2023, the complainant made on-line application bearing no.421042300008133 before the Collector, Bharuch, under the Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 2020, whereupon the present FIR came to be lodged against the applicant.
5. It is alleged that pursuant to the said FIR, the applicant came to be arrested on 25.12.2024. Thereafter, she had file application for regular bail, however, the same came to be rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch, vide order dated 01.02.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.58 of 2025. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 01.02.2025, the present applicant had approached this Court by way of filing regular bail application, and during the hearing of the application, learned advocate appearing for the applicant made a statement at the bar that the applicant is ready and willing to hand over the peaceful and vacant possession of the Page 3 of 10 Uploaded by M.A. SAIYED(HC00172) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 23:49:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12559/2025 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2025 undefined disputed property to the first informant within a period of one week from the date of her release. Therefore, taking into consideration the aforesaid statement made by the applicant- accused, a Coordinate Bench of this Court allowed the application and enlarge the present applicant on regular bail vide order dated 27.02.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Application (for Regular Bail - Before Charge-sheet) No.4023 of 2025 imposing a condition directing the present applicant- accused to file an undertaking before the concerned trial court at the time of executing bond that she will vacate the premises within a period of one week from the date of her release.
6. However, it appears that even after filing the undertaking, the applicant has not handed over the vacant and peaceful possession of the disputed property to the complainant, as voluntarily declared by her while seeking regular bail from the court.
7. Being aggrieved with the conduct of the applicant in not complying with the aforesaid condition, the complainant had filed Criminal Misc. Application No.305 of 2025 for cancellation of the bail before the trial court, and the trial court, vide order Page 4 of 10 Uploaded by M.A. SAIYED(HC00172) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 23:49:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12559/2025 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2025 undefined dated 03.05.2025, was pleased to allow the application, thereby cancelling the bail earlier granted to the present applicant and directing issuance of non-bailable warrant against her.
8. It is noteworthy that after the cancellation of the bail by the trial court, the present applicant had again filed application seeking regular bail before the trial court, however, the same came to be dismissed vide order dated 06.06.2025 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch, in Criminal Misc. Application No.401 of 2025. Thereafter, she had filed Criminal Misc. Application (for Regular Bail - After Charge-sheet) No.10608 of 2025 before this Court, which came to be disposed of as withdrawn vide order dated 03.06.2025.
9. It is also submitted that the applicant has also filed a quashing petition before this Court being Criminal Misc. Application No.7079 of 2025, which is still pending, and no interim order has been passed in the said petition.
10. Now, by way of filing the present application, the applicant has prayed to release her on regular bail.
Page 5 of 10 Uploaded by M.A. SAIYED(HC00172) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 23:49:17 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12559/2025 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2025 undefined
11. At the outset, learned advocate Mr.Rashesh Patel for Mr.Suraj Shukla, learned advocate appearing for the present applicant-accused, has submitted that this Court had, while allowing the application for regular bail, imposed the condition no.(g) in paragraph-8 in the order dated 27.02.2025 on the basis of the voluntary declaration made by the applicant, whereby the applicant was directed to file an undertaking before the trial court at the time of executing bond that she will vacate the premises within a period of one week from the date of her release. However, learned advocate has fairly admitted that the said condition has not been complied with by the applicant after she was released on bail.
12. It is noteworthy that when this Court had put a specific query to the learned advocate appearing for the applicant, whether the applicant had approached this Court for the modification of the condition of the order, then in response to the same, learned advocate fairly conceded that the applicant had not approached this Court regarding the same. Thereafter, when this Court had again asked the learned advocate appearing for the applicant, whether the applicant wants to comply with the condition of the order as the same was incorporated in the order Page 6 of 10 Uploaded by M.A. SAIYED(HC00172) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 23:49:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12559/2025 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2025 undefined on the basis of the voluntary declaration by the applicant herself, then in response to the same, learned advocate submitted that the applicant does not want to comply with the directions issued by this Court. Thereafter, when the learned advocate was asked by the Court, whether the applicant would comply with the conditions if she is released on temporary bail, then in response to the same also, learned advocate submitted that the applicant does not want to comply with the directions issued by this Court.
13. It is also noteworthy that when this Court had asked learned advocate appearing for the applicant to point out the circumstances which restrained the applicant to comply with the condition, which was imposed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court on the basis of her own statement, learned advocate could not point out a single one. It is pertinent to note that both, the applicant and her husband, are well-educated and are not layman.
14. Learned advocate Mr.Patel appearing for the applicant has pleaded the only ground that earlier a complaint was made by the complainant against the present applicant under the Gujarat Page 7 of 10 Uploaded by M.A. SAIYED(HC00172) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 23:49:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12559/2025 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2025 undefined Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 2020, which came to be filed by the Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Committee, Bharuch, vide order dated 13.06.2022 passed in MKM-3/Land Grabbing SR. No.88/2022, since the applicant and her husband made a statement that they are the tenants of the house and had rented the property from the complainant on a monthly rent of Rs.3000=00 by depositing an amount of Rs.1 lakh. Therefore, considering the same, the Committee was of the opinion that the dispute was of the civil nature relating to the tenant and landlord.
15. Considering the aforesaid, this Court had asked the learned advocate appearing for the applicant, whether the applicant will be able to produce any documentary evidence regarding the payments made towards the rent or the deposit made by them to the complainant. In response to the same, learned advocate shown the inability on the part of the applicant to produce such documentary evidence. This Court had also asked the learned advocate appearing for the applicant, whether the applicant had produced any such documentary evidence before the Committee, then in response to the same, learned advocate submitted that the applicant or her husband did not Page 8 of 10 Uploaded by M.A. SAIYED(HC00172) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 23:49:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12559/2025 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2025 undefined produce any documentary evidence regarding the payments of rent or the deposit made to the complainant, before the Committee, and therefore, the Committee had opined to file a police complaint against the present applicant-accused.
16. So, considering the aforesaid, more particularly, the conduct of the applicant and her husband, there appears to be a strong prima facie case against the present applicant. It further appears that only with a view to get the bail, a false declaration was made before the Coordinate Bench of this Court that the applicant is ready and willing to hand over the vacant and peaceful possession of the disputed property to the complainant, and on the basis of the same, the Coordinate Bench had, on humanitarian ground, considered the bail application and released the applicant on bail.
17. Prima facie, it appears that the applicant has not only cheated the complainant, but she has also misled this Court by making a false declaration. The conduct of the applicant suggests her mens rea. Further, it is not the case of the applicant that she has ever approached this Court for deletion or modification of the condition imposed in the order dated Page 9 of 10 Uploaded by M.A. SAIYED(HC00172) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 23:49:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12559/2025 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2025 undefined 27.02.2025 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No.4023 of 2025.
18. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, more particularly, considering the prima facie case against the present applicant, penal provision of the offence, as well as the intentional breach of the condition imposed in the order dated 27.02.2025 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No.4023 of 2025 along with the mens rea of the applicant, the present application does not deserve any consideration by this Court and the same is hereby rejected. However, considering the fact that the applicant-accused is a pregnant woman in custody, it would be open for her to file an appropriate application for temporary bail, in accordance with law.
(VIMAL K. VYAS, J.) /MOINUDDIN Page 10 of 10 Uploaded by M.A. SAIYED(HC00172) on Thu Sep 25 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 25 23:49:17 IST 2025