Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2023 (10) TMI 1504 - HC - Money LaunderingMoney Laundering - Seeking grant of bail - organised crime - hatching a conspiracy by impersonating as Government Officers of the highest ranks - HELD THAT - The Apex Court in Ranjitsing Brahmajeetsing Sharma v. State of Maharashtra Anr. 2005 (4) TMI 566 - SUPREME COURT inter-alia held that the role of the appellant was said to be of rendering help and support to the organizing crime syndicate while functioning as Commissioner of Police at different places. The Apex court was essentially concerned with the operation of Section 24 of MCOCA providing for punishment of public servant failing in discharge of their duty. However the court taking overall view of the matter with reference to the facts from the prima facie opinion that the High Court might not have been correct while coming to the conclusion that the appellant committed an offence under Section 3(2) as well as Section 24 of MCOC Act; the interim bail granted to the appellant was continued. In this case it was inter alia held There are offences and offences under the Penal Code 1860 and other penal statutes providing for punishment of three years or more and in relation to such offences more than one charge-sheet may be filed. As we have indicated herein before only because a person cheats or commits a criminal breach of trust more than once the same by itself may not be sufficient to attract the provisions of MCOCA. Furthermore mens rea is a necessary ingredient for commission of a crime under MCOCA. . It is a well settled proposition that these conditions are cumulative and not alternative. It was reiterated in Sandeep Omprakash Gupta 2022 (12) TMI 1103 - SUPREME COURT that the satisfaction contemplated regarding the accused being not guilty has to be based on reasonable grounds and the expression reasonable grounds means something more than prime facie grounds. It was further inter alia held that it contemplates substantial provable causes for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence. In the present case as per the prosecution the evidence against the petitioner is that she was roped in by Sukesh Chandra Shekhar to facilitate him to get in touch with various bollywood celebrities and the petitioner was always in knowledge of the fact that Sukesh Chandra Shekhar is running organized crime syndicate in Tihar Jail - It is an admitted case that the petitioner was not directly involved in the foundational crime. However taking into account the fact that the mens rea is a necessary ingredient this court even at the stage of bail has to examine and evaluate whether the petitioner was a member of the organized crime syndicate or had required mens rea. It is pertinent to mention here that the act alleged to have been committed by the alleged accused should not only be prohibited by law but should also be a cognizable offence punishable with imprisonment for three years or more and must have been done singly or jointly as a member of an organized crime syndicate or on behalf of such organized crime syndicate. The court is only required to evaluate and examine the case on the basis of broad probabilities. In regard to the offence to be committed in the future the antecedents of the offender have to be seen. It is a settled proposition that at the stage of bail the Court cannot meticulously examine the evidence and conduct a mini trial. The findings at this stage are tentative in nature and do not affect the merits of the case. The case at this stage has to be seen from the angle of prima-facie view. Even the rigors of section 21(4) of MCOCA does not completely oust the jurisdiction to grant bail if the broad probability is in favor of petitioner. In the present case there is nothing on the record regarding the criminal antecedents of the petitioner. It is also to be taken into account that the accused is a woman of 52 years of age and has been in custody since 30.11.2022. Conclusion - MCOCA is a special statute requiring strict interpretation and that the conditions for bail under Section 21(4) are cumulative and not alternative. Bail granted subject to specific conditions. Application allowed.
|