Cri.Appeal.198.22.doc

Ajay

IN

IN THE

THE HIGH

HIGH COURT

COURT OF

OF JUDICATURE

JUDICATURE AT

AT BOMBAY

BOMBAY

CRIMINAL

CRIMINAL APPELLATE

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 198 of 2022

Maruti Navnath Sonawane

Age : 46 years, Occ.: Service

R/s. At Sencies 32/6, Opp Mahindra building,

Sanjay Gandhi Nagar, Mumbai - 400 022.

.. Appellant.

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

(At the instance of Kalachowki Police Station)

.. Respondent.

....................



Mr. Darshit Jain i/by AID Legal, Advocate for the Appellant.



Mr. A.A. Palkar, APP for the State - Respondent.

...................

CORAM

: SMT SADHANA S. JADHAV &

MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ.

RESERVED ON

: APRIL 08, 2022.

PRONOUNCED ON : MAY 04, 2022.

JUDGMENT : (PER MILIND N. JADHAV, J.)

1.

By the present Appeal, the Appellant - Maruti Navnath Sonawane

has prayed for the following relief:

"(a)

That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to discharge the Appellant

from the alleged entire proceedings arisen in final report arising out of FIR

vide CR. No.70 of 2019 dated 07.04.2019 for alleged offence punishable u/s.

395, 397, 412, 341, 201 r/w 120 (B) of Indian Penal Code, section 3(i)(ii), 3(2)

and 3(4) of Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 Act and u/s 37

(1) (A) r/w 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act registered at the instance of

Kalachowki Police Station."

2.

A First Information Report ('FIR') came to be registered against

the Appellant and other co-accused in Kalachowki Police Station vide C.R.

1 of 40

Cri.Appeal.198.22.doc

No. 70 of 2019 dated 07.04.2019 for offences punishable under Sections 395,

397, 412, 341, 201 and 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC') read

with Section 37(1)(A) and 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.

Appellant is arraigned as accused No.3 in the report.

3.

On 11.05.2019, Respondent applied for approval to the

Commissioner of Police, Mumbai under the provisions of Section 23(1)(a) of

the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 ('MCOC Act') for

invoking the provisions of the said Act against the Appellant and other

accused in C.R. No. 70 of 2019.

4.

On 06.07.2019, the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai accepted the

approval and granted sanction thereby invoking the provisions of Sections

3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of the MCOC Act in C.R. No.70 of 2019 against the

Appellant and other co-accused.

5.

On 08.07.2019, charge-sheet in C.R. No.70 of 2019 was filed in

the court of the Special Judge for MCOCA at Bombay ('Trial Court').

6.

Appellant filed application under Exhibit No.93 in the Trial court

seeking discharge from the offences for which charge-sheet was filed against

him.

2 of 40

Cri.Appeal.198.22.doc

7.

By order dated 18.01.2022, the Trial court rejected the

Appellant's application for seeking discharge on the ground that there was

voluminous material available against the Appellant for proceeding against

him for the charges levelled against him and held that the Court did not find

any merit in his submission that the provisions of the MCOC Act are not

attracted. This order dated 18.01.2022 is impugned and challenged in the

present Criminal Appeal.

8.

Before we advert to the submissions made by the respective

counsels, it will be apposite to refer to such facts which are relevant for the

purpose of the present Appeal.

8.1.

It is the prosecution case that Appellant is involved in the crime

registered as C.R. No.70 of 2019 dated 07.04.2019.

8.2.

Complainant (informant) in C.R.No. 70 of 2019 is a designer and

supplier of gold ornaments and designs to his customers. He visits various

jewellers' shops in and around Mumbai to show and exhibit sample gold

ornaments and designs and thereafter receive orders for manufacturing them.

On the occasion of Gudi Padwa i.e. 06.04.2019, complainant decided to visit

various jewellers' shops on M.G.Road in Panvel to show his designs and

sample gold ornaments. Hence on the previous night i.e. 05.04.2019