GUJCOTOC Act Can't Be Invoked If Only One Chargesheet Has Been Filed Against Accused : Supreme Court

The bench noted that Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka on the contrary submits that all the offences alleged in the FIRs which are given in the Chart, are directly or indirectly committed for the benefit of the crime syndicate of which the petitioner/applicant is a member.

The bench proceeded to state that it is the Court's the prima facie view that for invoking the provisions of the GCTOC Act, the following conditions will have to be fulfilled:

(i) that such an activity should be prohibited by law for the time being in force;

(ii) that such an activity is a cognisable offence punishable with imprisonment of three years or more;

(iii) that such an activity is undertaken either singly or jointly, as a member of an organised crime syndicate or on behalf of such syndicate;

(iv) that in respect of such an activity more than one charge-sheet must have been filed before a competent Court; and

(v) that the charge-sheet must have been filed within a preceding period of ten years; and

(vi) that the Courts have taken cognisance of such offences.

The bench then noted, "Undisputedly, in the present case only one charge-sheet was filed in respect of an activity which can be said to have been undertaken by the petitioner/applicant as a member of an organised crime syndicate on behalf of such syndicate."

Taking into consideration this aspect of the matter and further that the petitioner/applicant has already been directed to be released on bail in respect of crime registered at Serial Nos. 1 to 5, the bench was inclined to allow the present Special Leave petition.

"The petitioner/applicant is, therefore, directed to be released on bail on such terms and conditions as found appropriate by the Trial Court. In addition, we impose the following conditions on the petitioner/applicant:

1. The petitioner/applicant shall report to the investigating officer on every Monday between 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m.

2. The petitioner/applicant will not attempt to influence the witnesses or tamper with the records", ordered the bench.

"The Court is of the view that If the provisions of Section-2(C) of the GUJCTOC Act are read with the judgment in the case of Sandip Omprakash Gupta case, the fact is clear that there are two main requirements for attracting provisions of the GUJCTOC Act against the applicant–accused. (1) More than one offense punishable with imprisonment of three years and more should have been registered against the accused in last ten years, wherein charge-sheet has been filed and the court has taken a cognizance of an offense. (2) Where the accused has committed any offense punishable with imprisonment of three years or more after this act has come into force. Both these requirements are met with in the case of present applicant–accused...In view of the foregoing reasons, no case is made out to exercise discretion in favour of the applicant more particularly when the main accused persons are still at large. The present application stands dismissed", the High Court had ruled in the impugned judgment.