The court's decision emphasized the interpretation of MCOCA provisions and the satisfaction of bail conditions under Section 21(4) of MCOCA.

JUDGMENT

1. By way of the present application, the applicant seeks regular bail in the FIR No.252/2018 dated 25th May, 2018, under Sections 3/4 of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA) registered at Police Station Alipur.

2. The first bail application of the applicant preferred before the Trial Court was rejected vide order dated 11th October, 2021. Subsequently, the applicant filed a bail application before this Court, which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 1st March, 2023. Thereafter, the second bail application filed before the Trial Court was dismissed on 15th May, 2023. Hence, the present application has been filed.

3. The case set up by the prosecution is as under:

3.1. The FIR No.252/2018 dated 25th May, 2018 was registered against the `Organised Crime Syndicate' (Syndicate) led by Jitender @ Gogi and his associates. The members of this Syndicate are involved in heinous offences including murder, robbery, extortion among others.

3.2. The accused Jitender @ Gogi stated in his disclosure statement dated 8th April, 2021, that he had settled the dispute of Rs.3 crores of the present applicant and also invested some proceeds of crime with him.

3.3. During investigation, it was found that the Protected Witness `D' had made a complaint dated 7th July, 2020 to the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), Outer North, Delhi, stating that the present applicant had misappropriated his payment of Rs.3 crores and threatened to kill him. This complaint was later transferred to the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) and the EOW registered the FIR No.86/2021 on 22nd June, 2021, under Sections 409/420/506/120 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) at Police Station EOW, Delhi.

3.4. During investigation, statements of various witnesses were recorded and it was revealed that the Gogi Gang used to threaten persons on behalf of the applicant and the applicant used to provide shelter to its members.

3.5. Based on the material on record, it was revealed that the applicant was an active member of the Syndicate and was arrested on 28th June, 2021.

4. In the Status Report filed by the State it has been submitted as under:

I. During investigation, Protected Witness `D' has deposed before the learned Magistrate under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) that the applicant called him on phone and handed over the phone to Jitender @ Gogi, who threatened him over the phone on behalf of the applicant. He further deposed that the applicant called him in person in Alipur area and got him threatened by one Deepak `Boxer', who is an alleged member of the Gogi Gang.

II. Protected Witness `E' has also stated in his statement under Section 164 of the CrPC before the Magistrate that the applicant along with another person threatened Protected Witness `D' and on account of such threats Protected Witness `D' did not come out of his house for a week.

III. Protected Witness `F' also deposed before the Magistrate under Section 164 of the CrPC and stated that he had met Gogi at the house of the applicant.

IV. Witness Ajit Kumar Bhadani in his statement under Section 161 of the CrPC given to the Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) has stated that when he demanded his money back from the applicant, the applicant threatened to get him killed by Jitender @ Gogi.

V. The applicant is also stated to have purchased properties in the name of his family members at a price which is grossly under-valued as compared to the actual cost of properties. The applicant has failed to explain how the balance money has been obtained to purchase the aforesaid plots.

VI. Reliance has been placed on the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Kamlesh Kothari v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC OnLine Del 3984.

5. The learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant has made the following submissions:

I. The applicant has been in custody since 28th June, 2021 and the trial in the present case would take a long time to c