2024:BHC-NAG:3749 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.191/2024 Kishor Pandurang Balpande ..vs..

State of Mah., thr.PSO Wathoda PS, Taluka and District Nagpur ...............................................................………………........................................………………………................................……………

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions Court's or Judge's Order and Registrar's orders ...............................................................………………........................................………………………................................……………

Shri S.P.Bhandarkar, Counsel for the Applicant.

Shri D.V.Chauhan, Public Prosecutor with Mrs.S.V.Kolhe, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.

CLOSED ON : 22/03/2024 PRONOUNCED ON : 28/03/2024

1. Heard.

2. Apprehending arrest at the hands of police in connection with Crime No.10/2024 registered with the non- applicant/police station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 149, 332, 353, 405, and 406 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 48(7) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 and under Section 3(1)(ii), 3(2), and 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (the MCOC Act), the applicant approached this court for grant of anticipatory bail.

3. The accusations are on the basis of report lodged by Circle Officer Anil Bramhe. As per the report, on 14.1.2024, he and other staff were on patrolling duty. They intercepted a truck carrying sand. On enquiry with driver of the truck about royalty, the driver could not produce it. When the informant was taking photographs of the truck, 5-6 persons by two four-wheelers came there and started abusing them in a filthy language. The said persons and driver of the truck fled away from the spot of the incident. During the said incident, cell phone of the driver fell on the ground, which was seized. The accused persons threatened the informant and prevented him from discharging his duties and, therefore, First Information Report was lodged against the co- accused. During investigation, involvement of the applicant is also revealed and, therefore, apprehending his arrest, he preferred the application.

4. Learned counsel Shri S.P.Bhandarkar for the applicant submitted that on the basis of hollow and baseless allegations, the applicant is implicated. In fact, the applicant was not present at the spot. The prosecution is taking aid of order dated 19.1.2024 granting approval by the competent authority investigating the matter by applying provisions of the MCOC Act. However, the approval order does not reflect name of the applicant. There is absolutely no role of the applicant. No single offence is registered against the applicant either in individual capacity or as a member of organized crime syndicate. The applicant has absolutely no concern with the crime or with the other co-accused. There is no nexus between the applicant and the other co-accused. As far as confessional statement of the co-accused is concerned, Section 18 of the MCOC Act would come into play only after sanction under Section 23(2) of the MCOC Act. There is absolutely no bar under Section 21(3) of the MCOC Act to entertain the application. Considering a fact that prima facie there is no material to connect the applicant with the co-accused, there is no prior approval showing name of the applicant and, therefore, the applicant be protected by granting his pre-arrest bail.

5. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on following decisions:

1. Writ Petition No.1959/2021 (Shabhana Parveen Inayatullah Shaikh vs. The State of Maharashtra (at the instance of Trombay Police Station C.R.No.332 of 2002) decided by this court at Principal Seat on 13.8.2021.

2. Criminal Application (BA) No.843/2023 (Shahrukh alias Kasal Shaikh Akram vs. State of Maharashtra, thr.PSO PS Nandanwan, Nagpur) decided