Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 27691
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
M. S. Karnik, J
DIVYESH RAJENDRA DESAI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR – Respondent
IA/3212/2022
The court emphasized that the applicant's alleged involvement in organized crime and the severity of the charges warranted the denial of bail under the MCOC Act.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 307, 326, 324, 504, 506(ii), 120-B, 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 188, 269; Arms Act - Section 4(25); Maharashtra Police Act - Sections 37(1), 135; National Disaster Management Act - Section 51(b); Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 - Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) - Bail application - Applicant seeks bail for serious offences including attempted murder and organized crime - The court requested the High Court to expedite the pending bail application, emphasizing the prolonged delay. (Paras 1, 3, 24)
(B) Organized Crime - Nature of organized crime under MCOC Act - The court discussed the applicant's alleged association with an organized crime syndicate, evaluating whether the MCOC Act applies based on the applicant's involvement and the nature of the charges. (Paras 11, 20, 23)
(C) Criminal Procedure - Requirements for bail - The court considered the nature of the injuries, the applicant's presence at the crime scene, and the evidentiary basis for the charges, concluding that the case did not warrant bail. (Paras 10, 24)
Facts of the case:
The applicant, involved in a property dispute, faces serious charges including attempted murder and organized crime stemming from a violent incident on July 18, 2021, involving multiple accused and injuries to the complainant and his associates.
Findings of Court:
The court found insufficient grounds for bail, citing the serious nature of the allegations and the applicant's potential connections to organized crime.
Issues: The main issues were the applicant's involvement in the alleged organized crime syndicate and the justification for denying bail based on the severity of the charges.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the applicant's alleged association with an organized crime syndicate, coupled with the serious nature of the charges, justified the denial of bail.
Result: Criminal Bail Application No.868/2022 stands rejected.
O R D E R
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, we see no reason to intervene at this juncture.
However, taking note that the bail application filed by the petitioner has been repeatedly adjourned by the High Court and we have been told that it is now listed on 24.01.2023, we request the High Court to consider and dispose of the bail application in accordance with law on the said date since as already noted the application has been pending for quite some time.
The Special Leave Petition is disposed of.
Pending application (s) shall stand disposed of.”
2. Accordingly, I have taken up Criminal Bail Application No.868/2022 for consideration and disposal. The other bail applications to stand de-tagged as request for adjournment is made in those matters.
3. The applicant-Vivek Chandrakant Manjrekar seeks bail in respect of C.R.No.63/2021 registered with DCB-CID, Unit- XI for the offences punishable under Sections 307 , 326 , 324 , 504 , 506(ii), 120-B , 143 , 144 , 147 , 148 , 149 , 188 , 269 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereafter ‘ IPC ’ for short) read with Section 4(25) of the Arms Act read with Section 37(1), 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act read with Section 51(b) of the National Disaster Management Act read with Sections 3(1) (ii), 3(2), 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (hereafter ‘MCOC Act’ for short) against 19 known accused and 5 unknown accused persons. Initially the First Information Report (FIR) was registered with MHB Police Station, Mumbai, vide C.R.No.599/2021. Thereafter, the investigation came to be transferred to DCB-CID and the present FIR bearing No.63/2021 came to be registered.
4. The prosecution case in brief is as under:-
The complainant is Divyesh Rajendra Desai whose statement was recorded on July 18, 2021 (page 63 of the paper-book). The dispute is in respect of the plot No.301, which is situated at Dahisar (W), Mumbai. The plot was originally owned by one Smt. Deubai Thakur. The same was purchased by Shri Taukir Khan in the year 1983 by a registered agreement. Since then the property is in possession of the Taukir Khan. In the year 1990, name of Smt. Kashibai Patil, who happened to be the sister of original owner Deubai Thakur along with her legal heirs mutated their names in the mutation entries and since then their names are reflected in the 7/12 extract. On a challenge by Taukir Khan, the Competent Authority set aside the mutation entries which were in favour of Kashibai Patil. In 2006, Kashibai Patil filed a suit in this Court which was dismissed in 2016. In July 2021, the complainant along with Taukir Khan, established a construction company by name ‘Solaris’ with an intention to construct a school on the said plot. Kashibai and her legal heirs, despite there having no title, sold the said plot to one Mukesh Bhatia (one of the accused) of ‘Icon Developers ‘ and Arun Upadhyay (also one of the accused) of ‘Shreeji Sharan Developers’. On July 8, 2021, when the complainant went to visit his plot, Arun Upadhyay and Mukesh Bhatia who happened to be physically present on the plot, informed the complainant that they had purchased the said property from Kashibai and her legal heirs. They tried to put up their board, displaying their name as owners and since then, the dispute is going on between the parties.
5. It is the case of the complainant that on July 18, 2021, the complainant along with his father, two advocates and other associates visited the said plot, when about 15 to 20 persons came there and tried to remove the board of the complainant on the property and asked the complainant and his associates to leave the spot saying that the property belongs to Mukesh Bhatia and Arun Upadhyay. When the complainant and his associates objected to that, the accused threatened to kill them if they failed to leave. When the complainant refused to leave, some of the accused ran towards an auto-rickshaw standing at the spot and took out deadly weapons like swords, bamboos and iron r
