IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
A. S. Gadkari, Sharmila U. Deshmukh, JJ.
Lata Ratan Rokade - Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. - Respondents
Criminal Writ Petition No. 2651 of 2023 with Interim Application No.3062 Of 2023
Decided On : 28-06-2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments from the petitioner (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court's examination of the legal and factual questions raised regarding approval and bail. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. court's observations on law applicability (Para 11 , 14 , 22 , 24) |
| 5. arguments by the intervenor and reasoning (Para 12 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. legal standards for interpreting organized crime provisions and bail applications. (Para 27 , 28) |
| 7. decisions on binding precedents (Para 30 , 32 , 33 , 38) |
| 8. final conclusion of the court (Para 39 , 41) |
JUDGMENT
A.S. Gadkari, J. - Petitioner has invoked jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE (for short, 'CrPC.'), challenging the 'Prior Approval' dated 5th July 2023, issued by Respondent No.2, under Section 23(1) (a) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (for short, 'M.C.O.C. Act') and for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.PC., in C.R. No.346 of 2023, dated 22nd May 2023, registered with Chikhali Police Station, Pimpri-Chinchwad Police Commissionerate, District Pune, under Sections 3 02, 120-B, 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and under Section 3 , 25, and 27, of the ARMS ACT , 1959 and under Section 3 7(1), (3) read with 135 of the MAHARASHTRA POLICE ACT and under Sections 3 (1) (ii), 3(4) of the M.C.O.C. Act.
1.1 The Intervenor is the original complainant / informant and has filed the aforenoted Interim Application for intervention, to address the Court and to oppose the prayer of the Petitioner.
2. Heard Mr. Joshi, learned counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Bhise, learned counsel for the Intervenor, Mr. Raja Thakare, learned senior counsel, amicus curiae, and Mr. Patil, learned A.PP for the Respondents. Perused entire record produced before us and the Written Submissions on behalf of the Petitioner, dated 25th October 2023.
3. The First Information Report is lodged by Mr. Rajendra K. Karle on 22nd May 2023. The informant is the maternal uncle of Krushna @ Sonya H. Tapkir (deceased). The prosecution case in brief is that, during the Navratri Festival arranged at Patil Nagar, Chikhali in the preceding year, a tussle took place between Karan Rokade (A.No.1) and his friends on one side and Krushna @ Sonya and his friends on the other side. In the said tussle altercations took place. At that time, Karan Rokade had threatened Krushna @ Sonya of dire consequences. Karan Rokade was also having grudge against Krushna @ Sonya, as the popularity of Krushna @ Sonya was on rise in the vicinity of Chikhali. That, on 22nd May 2023 at about 2.19 p.m. the informant received a call from his sister Smt. Jayashree H. Tapkir, who informed him that Krushna @ Sonya has been assaulted by somebody and admitted in hospital. The informant's nephew namely Milind told him that, on 21st May 2023 one Mr. Saurabh @ Sonya Pansare had come to meet Krushna @ Sonya and apologized for whatever happened during the Navratri Festival and to forget about the past. That, a friend of the informant told him that, at about 1.40 - 1.45 p.m. on the same day Saurabh Pansare and Siddharth Kamble had came on a bike at the place of offence, where Krushna @ Sonya and his friend were standing and thereafter Saurabh Pansare fired bullets on the chest, neck and other parts of body of Krushna @ Sonya and fled away on their KTM motorcycle. Krushna @ Sonya passed away on 22nd May 2023, while undergoing medical treatment. In this brief premise, present crime is registered.
4. During the course of investigation it revealed to the police that, the murder of Krushna @ Sonya is committed by the organised crime syndicate headed by Karan Ratan Rokade (A.No.1) and therefore the Senior Inspector of Police, Chikhali Police Station submitted a report dated 29th June 2023 to the Respondent No.2 for applying the provisions of M.C.O.C. Act to the said C.R. No. 346 of 2023. In the said proposal the Petitioner is named at Sr. No. 12, as a member o
A.P Mahesh Cooperative Urban Bank Shareholders Welfare Association Vs. Ramesh Kumar Bung & Ors.
Abhishek Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Ambica Quarry Works v State of Gujarat & Ors. (1987) 1 SCC 213
Anil Umrao Gote Vs. State of Maharashtra
Arnab Manoranjan Goswami Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Dr Shah Faesal & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Anr
Hema Mishra Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
Kartar Singh Vs. State of Punjab
Kavitha Lankesh Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors.
Muraleedharan V/s. State of Kerala
Prathvi Raj Chauhan Vs. Union of India & Ors.
Satpal Singh Vs. State of Punjab
Shabhana Parveen Inayatullah Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra
State of Bihar Vs. Kalika Kuer Alias Kalika Singh & Ors.
State of Maharashtra Vs. Abdul Hamid Haji Mohammed
State of Maharashtra Vs. Bharat Chaganlal Raghani & Ors.
State of Maharashtra Vs. Bharat Shanti Lal Shah & Ors.
State of Maharashtra Vs. Lalit S. Nagpal
State of Maharashtra Vs. Lalit Somdatta Nagpal
State of Maharashtra Vs. Pankaj Jagshi Gangar
The Regional Manager V/s. Pawan Kumar Dubey
U.P State Sugar Corporation Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Kamal Swaroop Tondon
Union of India V/s. Dhanwanti Devi
The court ruled that anticipatory bail cannot be granted under the M.C.O.C. Act when sufficient evidence of involvement is present and that precedent must articulate general legal principles.
(1) Offence under MCOCA must comprise continuing unlawful activity relating to organized crime undertaken by an individual singly or jointly, either as a member of organized crime syndicate or on beh....
(1) Organised Crime – For the purpose of organised crime, there has to be continuing unlawful activity – There cannot be continuing unlawful activity unless at least two charge-sheets are found to ha....
The court affirmed that involvement in an organized crime syndicate justifies stringent bail denials, emphasized by the presence of multiple charges and confessions from co-accused.
The court ruled that the applicant's involvement in organized crime and conspiracy to commit murder, supported by substantial evidence, justified the rejection of bail under the MCOC Act.
The main legal point established is that the grant of approval or sanction should demonstrate consideration of materials and application of mind, and any decision on defects in the approval or sancti....
The main legal point established is the requirement to establish a prima facie nexus between past crimes and the present crime to invoke the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to strictly construe the provisions of MCOCA, establish the mens rea, and consider the length of the period spent in custody and the unlik....
(1) Bail cannot be granted by way of interim relief in grave offences.(2) Quashing and setting aside wrong order releasing accused on bail and to cancel bail of accused on misuse of liberty etc., bot....
(1) Interpretation of Statute – Rule of strict construction cannot be applied in an impracticable manner so as to render the statute itself nugatory.(2) Organised crime – Any person who is declared a....
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.