ORDER : 1. The applicant, by way of this application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeks regular bail in connection with the FIR, being C.R. No. 11200045210282 of 2021 registered with Umargam Police Station, Dist. Valsad, for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 114, 323, 359, 343, 346, 120B, 34, 364(A), 465, 466, 467, 474 and 506(2) of IPC and under Section 25(1B)(a) of the Arms Act and under Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of the Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organized Crime Act, 2015 ('GUJCTOC Act' for short). 2. Brief facts leading to filing of present application are that: 2.1 According to prosecution case, an organized crime syndicate headed by accused Chandramohan Sonar, known for his gang as ''Chandan Sonal Gang'' was operating in whole over the India. The said syndicate had indulged in various continuous unlawful activities in nature of extortion, murder, abduction, abduction for ransom, crimes having severe consequences, robbery through their members either individually or jointly. It is in this back ground facts, the case of the prosecution in nutshell is that, the gang leader and members of the organized crime syndicate have had hatched the conspiracy to kidnap one Mr. Jitu Manilal Patel, resident of Umargam, Dist.: Valsad for ransom. The incident took place on 23.03.2021. Prior to the incident, reiki was conducted. In order to execute the conspiracy the accused referred in the chargesheet case papers, came at the scene of offence in a different cars. The victim Jitu Patel was on his way towards city area, by driving himself in his Fortuner car. When he reached at the scene of offence, the accused, who were following the victim, stopped him and at the gun point, he was kidnapped and taken to city Nasik. It is further case of the prosecution that, Rs.1,02,000/- was looted from the victim and he was secretly confined at the unknown place for ransom amount of Rs.30 crores. It is further case of the prosecution that based on CDR and other intelligence inputs, the investigating agency, caught red handed the accused. During the course of investigation, the entire conspiracy unearthed and it was revealed that the entire conspiracy hatched by the organized crime syndicate as referred above. The investigating agency has arrested in all 10 persons, including the present applicant herein. During the course of investigation, the entire conspiracy unearthed and it was revealed that the entire conspiracy hatched by the organized crime syndicate as referred above. The investigating agency has arrested in all 10 persons, including the present applicant herein. So far role of present applicant is concerned, he was driver of the one of the car, which was used in the alleged offence of kidnapping. It is further alleged that the applicant, was member of organized crime syndicate headed by accused Chandramohan Sonar and committed an offence of organized crime, either as member of organized crime syndicate or on behalf of such syndicate. After investigation, charge-sheet has been laid before the Special Judge, Surat. The applicant herein, was arrested on 03.07.2021. His regular bail application filed before the Special Court came to be rejected by the Court vide its order dated 24.12.2021. Being aggrieved with the order, he has preferred the present bail application before this Court. 3. This Court has heard learned counsel Mr. Harshit Tolia, appearing for and on behalf of the applicant and Mr. Manan Mehta, learned APP for the respondent-State. 4. Mr. Harshit Tolia, learned counsel submitted that, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. It is in this context, he submitted that after the arrest, the investigating agency conducted TI Parade, wherein, the applicant has not been identified by the complainant or the victim Jitu Patel. He urged that, as per the prosecution case the applicant was driver of the car and was member of the criminal conspiracy hatched by the Chandramohan Sonar. He further submitted that, there is no evidence to show the involvement of the applicant in the conspiracy and as such, the applicant has no nexus whatsoever with any of the co-accused and did not have received any monetary benefits. He further submitted that there is no primafacie case made out against the applicant for alleged offence of kidnapping for ransom, as the presence of the applicant at the scene of offence is not established. 5. Mr. Tolia, learned advocate further submitted that, the invocation of the provisions of the GUJCTOC Act, has been wrongly invoked by the investigating agency, as the ingredients of organized crime as defined under Section 2(e) of the Act are not satisfied. 5. Mr. Tolia, learned advocate further submitted that, the invocation of the provisions of the GUJCTOC Act, has been wrongly invoked by the investigating agency, as the ingredients of organized crime as defined under Section 2(e) of the Act are not satisfied. It is in this context, he submitted that, in order to establish continue unlawful activities, it is necessary to establish activities undertaken either singly or jointly, as a member of organized syndicate or on behalf of such syndicate, in respect of which more than 1 charge-sheet must have been filed in preceding period of last 10 months. In the fact of the present case, the ingredients of 'continuing unlawful activities' are not fulfilled as except the present FIR, no other offences are registered or pending against the applicant herein. 6. In the aforesaid contentions, learned counsel Mr. Tolia, submitted that the applicant is in custody since, 03.07.2021 and trial would not likely to conclude in near future and after filing the chargesheet, the further custody of the applicant is not necessary. Thus, therefore, he prays that considering the role attributable to present applicant herein and evidence in support of charge, he may be enlarged on bail imposing conditions whatever deemed it fit by the Court. 7. Opposing the bail application, learned APP Mr. Manan Mehta, submitted that, the presence of the applicant at the scene of offence is established and being a member of organized crime syndicate which indulged in various continuous unlawful activities in nature of extortion, offences affecting the human body and robbery, has committed an offence for and on behalf of the organized crime syndicate. He further submitted that, the victim was unable to identify the accused before the authority, who had conducted the TI parade, due to dark grasses of car. In such circumstances, learned State Counsel prays that considering the bar created under the Act, no case is made out for exercising discretion in favour of the applicant. 8. This Court has heard at length the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the material placed on record. 9. The applicant herein has been charged with the offence of GUJCTOC 2015. 8. This Court has heard at length the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the material placed on record. 9. The applicant herein has been charged with the offence of GUJCTOC 2015. It is alleged that he has committed the offence of organized crime, as a member of an organized crime syndicate headed by Chandramohan Sonar, whose network extends to whole over the India and the syndicate indulging in the offence of extortion, murder, contract killing. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant that, prosecution failed to establish that the applicant is involved in continuing unlawful activities as defined in Section 2(c) of the GUJCTOC Act. In this context, it is relevant to consider the offences registered against the applicant. Prior to this FIR, one offence in the year 2014, was registered against the applicant with the Surat Police Station, being I. CR. No. 30 of 2014, for the offences punishable under Sections, 302, 397. The competent court has acquitted the applicant in the said offence vide order dated 30.11.2018. Thereafter, the present FIR in the year 2021 came to be filed. Thus, this Court is prima-facie view that except the present FIR, no other cases are pending within the preceding period of 10 years. 10. The second contention raised by the learned counsel for the applicant is that there is no prima-facie case made out for the offence of kidnapping and abduction for ransom. After careful examination of the charge-sheet case papers, it appears that in the proceeding of TI parade, the victim and the complainant unable to identify the present applicant. 11. In view of the aforesaid discussions made hereinabove and considering the role attributable to present applicant herein and evidence in support of charge, this Court is of considered view that the case is made out for exercising discretion. Thus, without further discussions on the merits of the case and considering the permanent residence of the applicant, imposing stringent condition, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 12. Hence, the applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with the FIR, being C.R. No. 11200045210282 of 2021 registered with Umargam Police Station, Dist. Thus, without further discussions on the merits of the case and considering the permanent residence of the applicant, imposing stringent condition, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 12. Hence, the applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with the FIR, being C.R. No. 11200045210282 of 2021 registered with Umargam Police Station, Dist. Valsad, on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousands only), with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall : No. Conditions (a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty; (b) not act in a manner injuries to the interest of the prosecution; (c) surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week; (d) not leave India without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned; (e) furnish latest address of residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of the trial Court; (f) The applicant shall not enter leave the city Surat till conclusion of the trial, without prior permission of the Special Court, Surat except to attend the court proceedings and mark presence before the police station, if any. (g) The applicant shall mark his presence before the Surat City Police station on every first day of each English calendar month between 10-00 AM to 12-00 noon. 13. The authorities shall release the applicant if he is not required in connection with the any other offence. If breach of any above condition is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned shall take appropriate action or issue warrant against the applicant. The bail bond to be executed before the learned trial Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the sessions judge concerned to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law. Nothing stated hereinabove, shall tantamount to the expression of any opinion on the merits of this case. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service permitted.