N. W. SAMBRE, J.

Heard. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and by consent, the matters are heard finally.

2. By these applications under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicants/accused seek quashing of first information report in CR. No.43 of 2014, registered at Shevgaon police station, to their extent, insofar as an offence punishable under section 3 (1) (ii), 3 (2) and 3 (4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act 1999 (hereinafter referred to as "MCOCA", for the sake of brevity).

3. The applicants, claiming to be permanent residents of Ahmednagar district allege that they were arrested in CR. No.43 of 2014, which came to be registered with Shevgaon police station, on 15th February, 2014 for an offences punishable under sections 307, 395, 143, 147, 148, 149, 120-B, 323, 504, 506, 435 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 3 (25) and 4 (25) of the Arms Act. The applicants further claim that after their arrest in CR. No.43 of 2014, they have been released on regular bail by the Sessions Court at Ahmednagar.

4. It is the case of the applicants that subsequent to their release on bail, they came to know from reliable sources that the prosecution has decided to proceed against them under the provisions of MCOCA in CR. No.43 of 2014. It is further claimed by the applicants/accused that as the provisions of the said Act which are draconian in nature, the prosecution has sought to re-arrest the applicants for the offence alleged to have been committed by them under the MCOCA.

5. The applicants further submit that in view of apprehension of arrest under the MCOCA, pre-arrest bait application moved by them also came to be rejected.

6. In support of their contentions, the applicants/accused allege that the very applicability of the provisions of the MCOCA as against them is required to be quashed and set aside in view of the fact that the act of the prosecution of invoking the provisions of MCOCA is contrary to the requirement of the Act. The applicants allege that except C.R. No 43 of 2014, no other crime is registered against them, but for one single charge-sheet, no charge-sheet is filed or pending against them in any criminal Court. Vithal Munde, the informant in C.R. No.43 of 2014, has inter alia alleged in the first information report that since the sand spot in river bed of Godavari at Mungi was not allotted in auction to accused Yunus Chand Shaikh and it was allotted to one Rajendra Daund, annoyed by the same, accused Yunus Chand Shaikh, accompanied by the applicants herein and other accused named in the first information report, hatched a criminal conspiracy, formed an unlawful assembly and assaulted the informant and witnesses by means of sword, sticks, iron rods and stones and caused injuries to them. It is further alleged that the accused fired two rounds in air from the Revolver in their possession and thus tried to commit murder of the informant. The said accused also robbed the informant and witnesses of mobile phones and cash amount. In support of their contentions, the applicants have sought to rely upon the provisions of the MCOCA, more particularly provisions of clause (d) of section 2 of the said Act.

7. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants Shri Jahagirdgr and Shri Karnik have sought to urge that in view of the isolated offence registered against the applicants or pendency of only one charge-sheet against them, the applicants cannot be termed to have been involved in 'continuing un-lawful activity' as defined under MCOCA. The applicants also urge that the invocation .of provisions of section 23 of the MCOCA against them is also uncalled for as the said order, according to the applicants., suffers from non application of mind. The applicants have sought to rely upon the judgment of the Apex Court, in the matter of State of Maharashtra & ors. vs. Lalit Somdatta Nagpal & anr., reported in 2007 (1) Bom. C.R. (Cri.) 853: [2007 ALL SCR 1078], so as to