GOVIND SAKHARAM UDHE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Respondent waives service. By consent of the parties, taken up for hearing and final disposal.

(2.) The appellant is original accused 8 in MCOC Special Case No. 8 of 2007 pending in the Special Designated Court constituted under the Maharashtra Control of Organized crime Act, 1999 ("the MCOC Act" for short ).

(3.) We have heard Mr. Amit Desai, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant at some length. Mr. Desai submitted that the Special Court erred in dismissing the application for discharge filed by the appellant. He submitted that the appellant is involved in the present case on account of business rivalry. The present prosecution is a malafide prosecution. Learned counsel submitted that the entire case of the prosecution rests on statements of two witnesses. Mr. Desai took us through those statements and submitted that they do not show that the appellant is a part of the organized crime syndicate and he is involved in their activities of giving threats or collecting money, etc. There is no evidence to indicate that the appellant is involved in the alleged deep rooted conspiracy. The statements indicate that the appellant only wanted to help his colleague in business, who was in distress. He wanted to ensure that the matter is settled and Mr. 'x' is relieved of threats of extortion. On the basis of such evidence according to Mr. Desai, the appellant cannot be charged for offences under the shingent provisions of the mcoc Act. Mr. Desai further submitted that approval under Section 23 (l) (a) was accorded on 8/12/2006. In that approval the appellant's name does not figure. Mr. Desai submitted that even if this challenge is not specifically raised in the trial court or in this court, the contention of the appellant that the evidence collected by the accused does not make out an offence under the MCOC Act against him, covers this plea.