IMTIYAZ KHWAJA PATHAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application has been moved by the applicant under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in Crime No.19 of 2019 registered with Police Station Vanwadi, Pune, for offences punishable under Sec. 307, 120B, 201, 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 506(2) of Indian Penal Code (IPC), under Sec. 37(1) read with 135 of Maharashtra Police Act, under Sec. 3, 4(25) of Arms Act, Sec. 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act and under Sec. 3(1)(ii) and 3(2) of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOC Act).

(2.) It is the case of prosecution that on 4th January 2019 the informant learnt that some of the residents of Kanjarbhat vasti / relatives of the informant were assaulted by accused Tipu Pathan, Nadeem Khan and others. On 5th January 2019 the accused came near the residence of the informant armed with weapons. The accused assaulted the informant in front of his house. Accused Tipu Pathan had raised pistol and threatened the people. However, the informant managed to run inside his house. As the informant wanted to avoid any damage being caused to his vehicle Land Rover, he decided to keep the vehicle in the house of his neighbour. However, while he was proceeding in his vehicle, the accused, who were in large number, chased him and attacked his vehicle. It is also alleged that Tipu Pathan even fired at the vehicle. However, the informant somehow managed to reach Hadapsar Police Station and lodged the First Information Report (FIR). There are several cases registered against said Tipu Pathan who is running a crime syndicate and after the invocation of provisions of MCOC Act, charge-sheet came to be filed.

(3.) Mr.Aniket Nikam, learned counsel for the applicant, submits that there is no evidence against the applicant indicating or pointing out his involvement in the crime. This being so, the provisions of MCOC are wrongly applied qua the applicant. Further, according to the learned counsel, neither he is named in the FIR nor is seen in the CCTV footage collected by the investigating agency. It is only on the basis of statement of coaccused that the applicant has been roped in. Except antecedents, nothing is brought on record to show that the applicant was, in any manner, involved in the present crime. The learned counsel, therefore, submits that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.