Bombay High Court
Sachin Rajaram Dhore vs The State Of Maharashtra on 15 September, 2023
Author: M. S. Karnik
Bench: M. S. Karnik
2023:BHC-AS:27410
PMB 928-ba-445-23.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 445 OF 2023
SACHIN RAJARAM DHORE ..APPLICANT
VS.
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ..RESPONDENT
------------
Adv. Kedar J. Patil a/w Adv. Sachin Mane a/w Adv. Pratik
Tare a/w Adv. Sakshi Kadam a/w Adv. Jitesh Mundwa a/w
Adv. Gargi Joshi for the Applicant.
Ms. Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the State.
------------
CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 15, 2023
P.C. :
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned
APP for the State.
2. This is an application for bail in respect of the offence
punishable under Sections 307, 326, 143, 147, 148, 149 of
the Indian Penal Code (hereafter 'IPC' for short), under
Sections 3, 5, 25 of Arms Act, under Sections 37(1)(3), 135
of Maharashtra Police Act and under Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2),
3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act,
1999 (hereafter 'MCOCA', for short) registered on
1/7
PMB 928-ba-445-23.doc
25.03.2019 vide C.R. No.44 of 2019 with Bhuinj Police
Station, District Satara.
3. There are in all eleven accused. The applicant is the
accused no.9. The applicant was arrested on 26.07.2019.
The date of the incident is 25.03.2019. As per the case of
the prosecution the first informant along with his colleagues
were doing their job at Toll plaza situated at Pune-Satara
highway within the limits of virmude village. At that time
one white coloured car came and tried to escape without
paying toll amount. Hence, the employees at said toll plaza
stopped the car and asked the driver to pay the toll. At that
time the driver of the said car refused to pay the toll
amount and abused the employees. The accused No.1-
Rohidas Chorge fired a bullet from his pistol towards the
first informant. Nobody was injured. Learned APP submitted
that the offence is serious.
4. Factually there is no recovery of the pistol from the
applicant though it is the allegation that the applicant has
used a pistol for the purpose of firing at the time of
incident.
2/7
PMB 928-ba-445-23.doc
5. Learned counsel for the applicant sought bail on the
ground of parity. The trial Court by an order dated
26.08.2021 enlarged the co-accused No.5 - Vaibhav Sanjay
Sable on bail. The order reads thus :-
"This is the application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. r/w
Section 21 of Maharashtra Control of Organized Crimes
Act, 1999.
02. Applicant is arrested in Crime No.44 of 2019
registered with Bhuinj Police Station on 30.03.2019. Crime
is registered in respect of offences punishable under
Section 307, 326, 143, 147, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal
Code, Section 3, 5/25 of the Arms and Section 3(1)(i)(ii),
3(2), 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crimes
Act. Accused is in magisterial custody.
03. Application is filed on the ground that, accused has
not committed any offence much less the offence alleged
to have been committed by him, he is arrested on the
basis of skepticism, his name is not mentioned in the FIR
as well as statement of first informant, he has not inflicted
any injury to the first informant, no incriminating material
has been recovered or discovered at his behest, no specific
overt act has been attributed to the applicant, allegations
against him are vague, ambiguous and futile, there is no
cogent and reliable material on record which would
establish the nexus of applicant with the alleged offence or
alleged Organised Crime Syndicate, investigation is
completed, he is ready and willing to abide by any terms
and conditions imposed on him, he is ready and willing to
furnish surety to the satisfaction of the Court, he will not
tamper with the prosecution witnesses, he is permanent
resident of Sabalewadi, Taluka Khed, District Pune.
04. Application is opposed by prosecution by filing report
Exh. 129 of the Investigating Officer stating that, this
applicant has taken actual part in commission of offence
and he is very well seen in the CCTV footage collected
from the spot of incident, the CDR record of the mobile
3/7
PMB 928-ba-445-23.doc
handset used by the applicant is collected, the tower
location of said mobile shows that, the applicant was
present at the spot of incident at the time of commission of
offence, he has handed over the weapon Pistol used in the
commission of crime as per Section 27 of the Evidence Act,
it is also clear that he was in contact with the other
accused, if he is released on bail he may help the
absconding accused and he will also abscond, there is
possibility of tampering and pressurising the witnesses,
lastly prayed to reject the application.
05. Heard Advocate for applicant and learned A.P.P.
06. Advocate for applicant relied upon judgment of
Hon'ble High Court in Bail Application No.2241 of 2018
Girish Kumaran Nayar Vs. State of Maharashtra wherein it
is observed by Hon'ble High Court that, "in order to bring
an alleged act within the ambit of MCOC Act, the above
mentioned requirements are mandatory. Therefore, word
"in respect of which" in definition of clause of "continuing
unlawful activity" indicates that it is not a normal charge-
sheet, alleging commission of cognizable offence but
requirement is that alleged acts is undertaken either singly
or jointly by the accused, who is member of organised
crimes syndicate or is undertaken on behalf of such
syndicate In the case in hand, no efforts were made by the
prosecution to show that past. two offences in respect of
which charge- sheets were filed, were committed by the
applicant as member of organised crime syndicate, i.e.
acting as syndicate or a gang or on behalf of such
syndicate"
07. In present case, role attributed to the applicant is
that one Pistol is shown to be seized from the applicant as
per panchanama under Section 27 of the Evidence Act,
however FIR does not indicate that, applicant has used the
Pistol while commission of offence no one has sustained
injury by said firearm. To make applicable the provisions
MCGC Act applicant's Involvement in Crime No.31 of 2013
registered with Velhe Police Station is shown which was
registered in respect of offence punishable under Section
147 of the Indian Penal Code about which charge-sheet
bearing Regular Criminal Case No.401162 of 2014 was
filed and said case is disposed of, hence the alleged act
4/7
PMB 928-ba-445-23.doc
undertaken by the applicant cannot be said is undertaken
as a member of organised crime syndicate, no nexus has
been established between previous crime and present
crime, hence the applicant may be granted ball by
imposing conditions."
6. It is thus seen from the order that the co-accused
Vaibhav has used pistol in the commission of the offence
and the same has been seized from him as per panchanama
under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. So far as the present
applicant is concerned, learned APP pointed out from the
affidavit which is filed on behalf of the respondent that
there are as many as three cases pending against the
applicant prior to the registering of the present offence. So
far as the offence of the year 2011 is concerned, the
applicant has been acquitted. In C.R. No.262 of 2013
registered with Lonikand Police Station, Pune under
Sections 324, 323, 336 of the IPC which is shown to be
pending is concerned, learned counsel for the applicant
submitted that he has been acquitted. The copy of the
judgment of the trial Court acquitting the applicant in C.R.
No.262 of 2013 is placed on record. Thus, there is a C.R.
No.1021 of 2016 registered with Lonikand Police Station,
5/7
PMB 928-ba-445-23.doc
Pune under Sections 364, 342, 324, 323, 504 of the IPC
which is pending against the applicant and the present case.
7. The investigation is complete. The charge-sheet has
been filed. The trial is likely to take a long time to conclude.
The applicant is in custody almost for four years and two
months. The applicant can be enlarged on bail. Hence, the
following order :-
ORDER
(a) The application is allowed.
(b) The applicant-Sachin Rajaram Dhore in
connection with C.R. No.44 of 2019 registered with Bhuinj Police Station, District Satara shall be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount.
(c) The applicant shall attend the Investigating Officer of Bhuinj Police Station, District Satara once in a month every first Monday of the month between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m.
(d) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer. The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.
6/7 PMB 928-ba-445-23.doc
(e) On being released on bail, the applicant shall
furnish his contact number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change.
(f) The applicant shall not enter the jurisdiction of Lonikand Police Station, District Pune considering the number of antecedents against him, though the offence is registered at Bhuinj Police Station, District Satara as the offence is alleged to have taken place at Bhuinj on the way to Satara.
8. The application is disposed of.
(M. S. KARNIK, J.) 7/7 Signed by: Pradnya Bhogale Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 16/09/2023 11:26:52