AAKIF ATEEQUE NACHAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant is one of the six accused accused no.4 in M.C.O.C. Special Case No.10 of 2012, pending before the Special court under the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (hereinafter referred to as M.C.O.C. Act), Thane. The said case is in respect of offences punishable under Sections 120B, 153A, 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), offences punishable under the Arms Act, apart from the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of the M.C.O.C. Act. Additionally, the applicant and the other accused are alleged to have committed offences punishable under Sections 16 and 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, as amended till 2008 (hereinafter referred to as U.A.P. Act). By the present application, the applicant seeks bail.

(2.) I have heard Mr.S.R.Pasbola, the learned counsel for the applicant, and Mrs.S.V.Sonawane, the learned APP for the State. I have also heard Mr.Subhash Jha, the learned counsel, who sought intervention in the matter, on behalf of the first informant, to oppose the grant of bail. With the assistance of the learned counsel, I have gone through the bail application, the annexures thereto, and all the relevant parts of the chargesheet. I have also been taken through the affidavit filed by the Investigating Officer for opposing the grant of bail.

(3.) The facts of the case were noticed in sufficient details while dealing with the bail application filed by a coaccused Shamil Saquib Nachan (Bail Application No.512 of 2013, decided on 6.5.2013). The facts, which are taken from Column No.16 of Form 5E of the printed prescribed proforma of the chargesheet, were properly and sufficiently described in the said order, and as such, they may be described in the same manner here as follows :