DARASING Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Section 12 of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (hereinafter the MCOC Act) being aggrieved and dissatisfied by judgment and order returned by the learned Special Judge, MCOC, Aurangabad convicting the appellants under Section 3(1)(ii) and Section 3(4) of the MCOC Act and sentencing them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 12 years under Section 3(1)(ii) and rigorous imprisonment for 10 years under Section 3(4) and in addition imposing a fine of Rs.5,00,000/- on each, count in default sentencing them to further rigorous imprisonment of two years on each count.

(2.) The facts which lead to the Appeal may be summarized as under:

(3.) The learned advocate Mr. Ghanekar vehemently submitted that bearing in mind the fact that Section 3 of the MCOC Act prescribes for punishment for 'organized crime' as defined under Section 2(1)(e) and not for being involved in 'continuing unlawful activity' as defined under Section 2(1)(d), the appellants could not have been convicted under that provision without being charged for any substantive offence. He would submit that though continuing unlawful activity is an ingredient for constituting an organized crime, in order to constitute an organized crime, the offender must be involved in some crime of the kind described in the definition of organized crime. He would therefore submit that mere proof regarding involvement of the appellants in continuing unlawful activity was not sufficient to convict them. He would submit that admittedly, the appellants have not been charged for any substantive offence in the present crime and have been convicted merely for engaging in continuing unlawful activity during previous years.