Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3 Learned senior counsel for the applicant submits that the allegations as against the applicant are false and baseless. He submits that the confessional statement of the applicant recorded under Section 18 of the MCOC Act has been subsequently retracted by the applicant. He submits that there is a discrepancy in what is stated by the applicant in his confessional statement under Section 18 and the the confessional statement of co-accused Imran Khan, also recorded under Section 18 of the MCOC Act, with respect to where the conspiracy was hatched, who gave the 14-BA-2270-2019.doc money, etc. He submits that admittedly, the applicant was in Uttar Pradesh at the time of the alleged incident. Learned senior counsel also relied on the orders passed by this Court enlarging the co-accused Vikas Chaubey and Shailendra Lodha, on bail. He submits that there is no corroboration to the confessional statement of the applicant and co-accused Imran Khan and as such the rigours of Section 21(4) of the MCOC Act will not apply. 4 Learned A.P.P vehemently opposes the bail application.

Learned A.P.P has filed an affidavit of Shri Vishwas D. Walvi, Sub- Divisional Police Officer, Boisar Division, District Palghar, to oppose the bail application. She further submits that the applicant is the gang leader and that there are several antecedents as against him. She further submits that the confessional statement of the applicant recorded under Section 18 of the MCOC Act clearly points to the complicity of the applicant and that the same is corroborated by the CDR records. She further submits that the possibility of the applicant tampering with the witnesses/evidence also cannot be ruled out. Learned A.P.P submits that during the pendency of the aforesaid application, the applicant has committed another offence. She submits that when the applicant was being produced before the trial Court, the applicant assaulted a police Officer, pursuant to which, C.R. No. 196/2019 was registered as against the applicant and others on 21st July 14-BA-2270-2019.doc 2019 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 353, 186 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

5 Perused the papers. According to the prosecution, the first informant-Faizan Ansari, Javed (injured), Imran Khan (assailant), Vikas Choubey @ Chindi and Shailendra Lodha were friends and running business with each other's help. It is alleged by the prosecution that thereafter, the relations between them became strained and due to the business rivalry, two groups were formed i.e. Javed and Faizan on one side and the accused persons i.e. Imran, Vikas and Shailendra on the other. According to the prosecution, the applicant also had motive to kill Javed Ansari and pursuant to the same, hatched a conspiracy with other co- accused. It is alleged that pursuant to the said conspiracy hatched by the applicant (gang leader of the group), the accused persons i.e. Imran and Vikas attacked Javed Ansari on 11th August 2015. Co-accused - Imran Khan is alleged to have fired at Javed Ansari and co-accused Vikas is alleged to have assaulted Faizan with a bottle. Accordingly, FIR was registered at the instance of the complainant - Faizan Ansari with the Tulinj Police Station alleging the aforesaid offences as against Imran Khan, Vikas Choubey and Shailendra Lodha. During the course of investigation, the said accused were arrested. Investigation revealed that co-accused 14-BA-2270-2019.doc Shailendra Lodha was in touch with the applicant, prior to the commission of the offence and that the applicant was also in touch with the co-accused. It is the prosecution case that the applicant (gang leader) along with the other co-accused i.e. members of his syndicate, committed a series of offences with the sole object of gaining illegal pecuniary benefit for the organised crime syndicate. During the course of investigation, the applicant was arrested on 22nd October 2015. Subsequently, provisions of the MCOC Act were invoked. The confessional statement of the applicant and co-accused - Imran Khan were recorded under Section 18 of the MCOC Act. There is no dispute that the applicant was in Uttar Pradesh at the time of the alleged incident. A perusal of the confessional statement of the applicant prima facie shows his complicity. In the said confessional statement, the applicant has stated the motive for eliminating Javed; that he along with other co-accused decided to eliminate Javed as he was making life difficult for everyone; that money was given to the accused Imran and Vikas for executing the work, when the applicant was in Uttar Pradesh. The applicant has, in his statement, further stated that for 15 to 20 days, Imran and Vikas were unable to execute the plan, pursuant to which, he called co-accused Shailendra asking him as to when he was going to execute the plan. He has stated that he would also call Imran and Vikas and ask, when the plan would be executed. The statement though retracted 14-BA-2270-2019.doc subsequently, prima facie shows the complicity of the applicant in the attack on Javed. Similar is the statement of co-accused against Imran Khan (assailant). Whether or not there are discrepancies with respect to where the conspiracy was hatched or who paid the money, the same will be decided by the trial Court at the stage of trial. The said confessions are duly corroborated by the CDR records which show that the applicant was in touch with the assailants i.e. the co-accused.