Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 57 (BOM)

Anil Bhaiyaji Raut v. State of Maharashtra

2006-01-17

R.C.CHAVAN

body2006
JUDGMENT :- This is an application under Section 439 read with Section 21 of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (for short "MCOCA"). The applicant has been in custody since 3rd August, 2004 after the offence in respect of which the applicant was apprehended was treated as one under MCOCA. The learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that for application of provisions of MCOCA, it is necessary for the prosecution to show that the applicant was either member of organised crime syndicate or operating on behalf of such syndicate and he was indulging in continuing unlawful activities by use of violence or threat of violence for gaining pecuniary benefits, or gaining undue economic or other advantages. According to the learned counsel, out of six offences listed in the reply filed by learned A.P.P. three are prior to the year 1999 when the Act came into force. Therefore, they subserve to be excluded from the consideration except for showing criminal antecedents, as held by this Court in Criminal Application No.330l of 2005 (Sanjay Bhadre Vs. State of Maharashtra). Fourth offence is one punishable under Section 324 of the Penal Code which has nothing to do with gaining any undue economic advantage. In respect of fifth offence punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of the Penal Code, even the learned A.P.P. confirms that the applicant has been acquitted. This leaves only one offence punishable under Sections 397 and 398 of the Penal Code. In that case, the applicant is already on bail. 2. The learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that mere filing of the charge-sheet in number of crimes would not be enough to attract the application of MCOCA, since MCOCA ought to be applied only in relation to some crime which is committed as a part of organised crime. Since the material on which the prosecution relies does not primafacie show that there is any offence which the applicant could be said to have committed as a part of continuing unlawful activity either as a member of organised crime syndicate or on behalf of such syndicate, bar of Section 21 of MCOCA may not apply. 3. In view of this, since it is not shown that the applicant has indulged in any offence where the State wants his detention, he may be released on P.R. of Rs. 3. In view of this, since it is not shown that the applicant has indulged in any offence where the State wants his detention, he may be released on P.R. of Rs. Fifty Thousand with one or more solvent sureties in the like sum on the following conditions. : (1) The applicant shall report to the Police Station, Sakkardara, Nagpur twice in a week. The applicant shall not leave the area of Nagpur Commissionerate without the prior permission of the Investigating Officer. (2) It is made clear that the applicant shall co-operate with the investigation. The applicant shall not in any way make an attempt to influence the witness or tamper with the evidence. (3) It is further made clear that if the applicant indulges in any criminal activities or make an attempt to influence the witnesses, the State shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail granted to the applicant. The observations made herein are purely prima facie in nature and the learned trial Court would not be influenced by it.