Bombay High Court
Amol Lala @ Lalu Kale vs The State Of Maharashtra on 8 December, 2021
Author: V. G. Bisht
Bench: V. G. Bisht
BA-2347-2021.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.2347 OF 2021
AMOL LALA @ LALU KALE )...APPLICANT
V/s.
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA )...RESPONDENT
Mr.Dilip B. Shinde i/b. Mr.Sachin Bhavar, Advocate for the
Applicant.
Mrs.P. P. Shinde, APP for the Respondent - State.
CORAM : V. G. BISHT, J.
RESERVED ON : 24th NOVEMBER 2021
PRONOUNCED ON : 8th DECEMBER 2021
P.C. :
1 The present application has been moved by the
applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in
Crime No.738 of 2018 registered with Police Station Karmala, for
offences punishable under Section 395, 397, 342 of the Indian
Penal Code (IPC) and under Section 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of
the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOC Act).
Digitally
signed by
ARTI
AVK 1/6
ARTI VILAS
VILAS KHATATE
KHATATE Date:
2021.12.08
13:38:37
+0530
BA-2347-2021.doc
2 It is the case of the prosecution that on 19 th
September 2018 six unknown persons in the age group of 25 to
30, their faces covered with black cloth, with a view to commit
dacoity assaulted the informant by means of an iron rod on her
back, waist and thigh and looted an amount of Rs.57,000/-, gold
ear tops (weighing 10 gms) worth Rs.25,000/-, two gold ganthan
(weighing 30 gms and 40 gms) worth Rs.75,000/- and
Rs.90,000/- respectively and a mobile phone worth Rs.1,000/-.
Informant, accordingly, lodged the report.
3 Mr.Dilip Shinde, learned counsel for the applicant,
submits that the First Information Report (FIR) was registered
against unknown persons and as such no prima facie case is
made out against the applicant, although it is alleged that
Rs.3,000/- has been recovered from the applicant but that too
after one year. No Test Identification Parade is carried out till
date. Similarly, the applicant is neither a gang leader nor he is a
member of any organized crime syndicate. Therefore, the
prosecution against the present applicant under provisions of
AVK 2/6
BA-2347-2021.doc
MCOC Act itself is not maintainable in law. Investigation is
completed and charge-sheet has been filed. In such
circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the
applicant behind the bars, argued learned counsel.
4 Smt.P. P. Shinde, learned APP, on the other hand,
opposed the submissions and invited my attention to the reply
filed by the Investigating Officer. The learned APP mainly placed
reliance on the confessional statement of the applicant and
would submit that in view thereof and as also the antecedents,
the application does not deserve consideration.
5 The learned counsel for the applicant, by way of
reply, submits that the so called confessional statement has been
retracted by the applicant before the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate and in such circumstances, practically there is no
evidence to connect the applicant to the alleged offence.
AVK 3/6
BA-2347-2021.doc
6 Perused the investigation papers. I have also gone
through the Affidavit-in-Reply of the Investigating Officer. At the
outset, I may mention here that some of the accused have already
been enlarged on bail by the learned Special Judge under the
MCOC Act, Pune.
7 Admittedly, the incident had taken place in the year
2018. It is the case of prosecution that all the accused had
covered their faces with black cloth. Till date, no identification
parade has been carried out. It is only on the basis of so called
confessional statement that the present applicant has been
arraigned as an accused. In this regard, I may note from the
record that the so called confessional statement has been
retracted by the applicant before the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate on 30th September 2019. The statement of applicant
was recorded by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate and it
would appear that his thumb impression was obtained forcibly
and his statement was not recorded as per his say. In such
circumstances, much weightage cannot be given to the so called
AVK 4/6
BA-2347-2021.doc
confessional statement. As far as recovery of Rs.3,000/- is
concerned, that is effected after more than a year. There is no
other evidence which would, in any way, connect the applicant
with the alleged offence.
8 As far as criminal antecedents are concerned, which
are given in the Affidavit-in-Reply, that by itself will not be
sufficient, particularly when other cogent and convincing
evidence about the involvement of the applicant in the alleged
offence is lacking. This being so, bar of Section 21(4) of the
MCOC Act will not come in way of the applicant.
9 For all the aforesaid reasons, I am inclined to allow
the application. Hence, I pass the following order :
ORDER
(i) Applicant - Amol Lala @ Lalu Kale shall be released on bail in Crime No.738 of 2018 registered with Police Station Karmala, on his executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in like amount. AVK 5/6
BA-2347-2021.doc
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall attend the Court proceedings regularly.
(iv) Bail before the trial Court.
(v) Parties to act on copy of this order duly authenticated by the Sheristedar of this Court.
(vi) It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima facie and the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merit, in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.
(vii) The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and stands disposed off accordingly.
(V. G. BISHT, J.) AVK 6/6