D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, SURYA KANT
Zakir Abdul Mirajkar – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of organized crime and mcoca (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments regarding confessions and procedural safeguards under mcoca (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. analysis of mcoca and organized crime definitions (Para 15 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 22) |
| 4. discussion of the necessity and validity of approval under mcoca (Para 70 , 76) |
| 5. final decision on the appeals and eligibility for bail (Para 80 , 81) |
JUDGMENT :
Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, J.
| Contents | |
| A. Facts | |
| B. Issues | |
| C. Submissions | |
| D. | Analysis |
| i. An overview of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act 1999 18 | |
| ii. Confession made before a police officer “not below the rank of the Superintendent of Police” | |
| iii. Conditions for invocation of the MCOCA | |
A. Facts
1. The prosecution alleges that the appellants are members of an organized crime syndicate which has engaged in a systematic course of activities for cheating members of the public by conducting the ‘Mumbai Matka’. To explain ‘matkas’ in simple terms, those who wish to gamble place bets on numbers/play
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.