Gujarat High Court Enlarges Man Booked In 2013 Sabarmati Prison Break Attempt Case On Regular Bail

The Gujarat High Court granted regular bail to Saquib Nisar Shaikh–booked in connection with the 2013 Sabarmati prison break attempt case by allegedly digging a tunnel, noting that the applicant had already been in jail for over a decade with no immediate prospect of completion of trial.

The FIR was registered under IPC Sections 224 (intentionally escaping or attempting to escape from lawful custody), 120B (criminal conspiracy), 130(escape of, rescuing, or harbouring a prisoner of war or state prisoner )and Sections 42 (Penalty for introduction or removal of prohibited articles into or from prison and communication with prisoners) and 45 (conspiring to escape or to assist in escaping, or to commit any other of the offences aforesaid) of the Prisons Act, 1894.

The Counsel appearing for Saquib submitted that he is not involved in the alleged crime mentioned in the FIR. He said that given the applicant's role and the nature of the accusations, he should be granted regular bail with appropriate conditions. Meanwhile the APP appearing for the state vehemently opposed the bail and submitted that the charges are serious and impact society as a whole. Given the facts and allegations against the applicant, no discretion should be used in granting bail, the state said. 

A Single Judge Bench of Justice Nirzar Desai in its October 28 order said, "In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations, this Court is of the opinion that, discretion is required to be exercised to enlarge the applicant on regular bail". 

The court in its order took into account the fact that Saquib had been in jail since 2013 and there is no likelihood that the trial will be over soon, the investigation is over and chargesheet is filed. It said that the co-accused whose roles are identical have been enlarged on bail by the high court and the Supreme Court and on the ground of parity, the Saquib's case deserves consideration. 

Justice Desai further observed that the APP couldn't point out that the applicant's (Saquib) role is different from that of the co-accused, who have been considered by both the Supreme Court and this Court.

The Court then observed “…this Court, prima facie, is of the opinion that, this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Hence, present application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail…”.

The Court directed the applicant further execute a personal bond on Rs 10,000 and with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. It further imposed conditions on the applicant including that he should not misuse liberty, surrender passport to the lower court within a week, not to leave India without prior permission of the Sessions Judge, furnish address of residence to the Investigating Officer and the Court at the time of execution of bond, not to change his residence without prior permission of the Court and mark his presence before concerned police station in the first week of every month, till the trial is over.

The Court then observed in its order, “If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter”. 

Furthermore, the high court directed the Trial Court not to be influenced by the preliminary observation with respect to the evidence at this stage, made by this court while enlarging the applicant on bail.

Case Title: Saquib Nisar @ Saquib Nisar Ahmed Shaikh v/s State of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 171

Click Here To Read/Download Order