Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Avtar Singh Kocchar @ Dolly - Appellant
Versus
The State of NCT of Delhi - Respondent
Bail Appln. 1811 of 2023
Decided On : 29-11-2023
MCOCA - Bail Application - Section 439 of CrPC r/w Sec. 21 (4) of MCOCA - [Section 3 & 4 of MCOCA, 1999] - The court analyzed the provisions of MCOCA and the essential ingredients of the offence u/s 3 of the MCOCA. The court considered the role of the accused in the organized crime syndicate and the requirement of more than one charge-sheet filed before a competent court within the preceding period of ten years. The court also emphasized the need to establish the mens rea and the nature and seriousness of the offences. The court granted bail to the petitioner considering the length of the period spent in custody and the unlikelihood of the trial being completed anytime soon.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a bail application filed under Section 439 of CrPC r/w Sec. 21 (4) of MCOCA in FIR bearing no. 208/2021. The petitioner was alleged to have orchestrated Hawala operations and facilitated the collection and transfer of extorted money through Hawala.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's role was confined to facilitating the transfer of extorted money through Hawala. There was no evidence of direct interaction between the accused and the mastermind of the syndicate. The court considered the petitioner's age and health conditions, the unlikelihood of the trial being completed soon, and the need to balance the legislative policy against the grant of bail with the constitutional right to a speedy trial.
Issues: The key issues involved the interpretation of the provisions of MCOCA, the requirement of more than one charge-sheet filed before a competent court within the preceding period of ten years, the mens rea, and the nature and seriousness of the offences.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the need to strictly construe the provisions of MCOCA, the requirement to establish the mens rea, and the consideration of the length of the period spent in custody and the unlikelihood of the trial being completed anytime soon.
Final Decision: The court granted bail to the petitioner considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, subject to certain conditions.
JUDGMENT
| Sl.No. | INDEX | Para Nos. |
| 1. | FACTUAL MATRIX | 1-7 |
| 2. | SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER | 8-16 |
| 3. | SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT/E.D. | 17-28 |
| 4. | FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIOIN | 29-46 |
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
FACTUAL MATRIX
1. The present Bail Application has been filed under Section 439 of CrPC r/w Sec. 21 (4) of MCOCA in FIR bearing no. 208/2021 registered at Special Cell Police Station (Delhi) under Sections 170/186/386/388/419/420/406/409/468/471/353/506/120B of IPC and Section 66D of IT Act and Section 3 & 4 of Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 [`MCOCA']. The bail application filed by the petitioner in case titled "State v. Sukesh Chandrashekhar & Ors." was dismissed vide order dated 08.07.2022 by Learned Additional Sessions Judge
2. Briefly Stated facts of the case are:
i. The present FIR has been registered on the basis of the complaint of the Complainant Ms. Aditi Singh alleging therein that on 15.06.2023 she received a call from one landline number on her mobile phone in which the caller introduced himself as a senior officer in the Ministry of Law and proposed to help her in securing bail for her husband who was running in Judicial Custody in cases related to M/s Religare Enterprises Ltd. It is alleged that the said caller demanded a sum of Rs.20 crores from the complainant for getting the work done and conveyed the modalities regarding the delivery of money. The caller further through his associates extorted money from the complainant on multiple occasions. The extorted money was to the tune of Rs.217 Crores.
ii. It is alleged upon conducting technical surveillance on the cell phone used by said caller, the identity of the caller was found to be Sukash Chander Shekhar, who was already lodged in Rohini Jail as UTP in the case of allegedly taking money from AIADMK leader TTV Dinakaran under the guise of assisting him in retaining the 'two leaves' symbol for his party. Further, the complainant alleged that she received a call demanding Rs.1 crore on August 7, 2021. Following receipt of this information, a trap was laid down, and accused Pradeep Ramdanee who came in a Hyundai I-20 was apprehended red-handed while receiving Rs.1 Crore from the complainant. Accused Pradeep Ramdanee disclosed that he collected the money on the instructions of his brother Deepak Ramnani and at the instance of Pradeep Ramdanee, his brother Deepak Ramnani was also arrested. Their interrogation led to the mastermind Sukesh Chander Shekar who had roped both of them to collect the extortion money from the complainant.
iii. On the intervening night of 07/08.08.2021 raid was carried out by Special Cell at Cell No. 204, Ward No. 3 of Jail No. 10, Rohini Jail, and two mobile phones were recovered from the possession of Sukesh Chander Sekhar. He was arrested in the present case. Further, the interrogations of the accused led to the identification of their associates and co-conspirators and each facilitator played a different role thereby it was revealed that Avtar Singh Kochar has played an important role as a Hawala Operator in running the crime syndicate led by Sukash.
iv. During the investigation, it was further revealed that the accused/applicant Avtar Singh Kochar, Hawala Operator, joined the organized syndicate of crime led by Sukash and he knowingly helped Sukash in running a crime syndicate inside Jail premises in lieu of hefty commissions and without his help, the syndicate could not have been able to achieve its goal. On 14.09.2021, accused/applicant Avtar Singh Kochar@Dolly was brought to the office of EOW by the team of Special Cell and was apprehended from Panchkula.
3. During the investigation, the applicant/accused disclosed that his transport business was in losses. Thereafter, he jumped into finance and took a rented shop near Ajmal Khan Road, Bata Showroom in Karol Bagh. Gradually, he got acquainted with Angadias and Hawala traders and he started sending the money of merchants to different cities through Hawala. Further, it was stated that he m
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....
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 court's decision emphasized the interpretation of MCOCA provisions and the satisfaction of bail conditions under Section 21(4) of MCOCA.
The MCOC Act can be applied to individuals involved in organized crime based on their nexus with a crime syndicate, even if they are implicated in a single case, provided there is sufficient evidence....
MCOCA Section 21(4) bail denied only if reasonable grounds beyond prima facie establish guilt; calls, photos, unlinked deposits insufficient absent confession mention or proven syndicate nexus.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
