Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Vijay Anant Vashirde, was an accused in MCOC Special Case No.6 of 2009 under the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA). He filed a Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking directions to the State of Maharashtra to establish a Review Committee on the lines of directions given by the Supreme Court in Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab (1994 SCC (Cri.) 899) for the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) and as incorporated in the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) (Amendment) Act, 2003 (since repealed). The petitioner argued that such a Review Committee was necessary to screen the abuse and misuse of MCOCA provisions, and that all pending and newly registered cases under MCOCA should be referred to such a Committee. He also sought a declaration that MCOCA provisions were not attracted to his case. The State opposed the petition, contending that MCOCA does not provide for any Review Committee and that the directions in Kartar Singh were specific to TADA and cannot be imported into MCOCA. The High Court, after hearing submissions, held that MCOCA is a complete code in itself and does not contain any provision for a Review Committee. The Court observed that the directions in Kartar Singh were given in the context of TADA to prevent its misuse, but those directions cannot be read into MCOCA as the legislature has not chosen to provide such a mechanism. The Court further held that it cannot legislate or add provisions to a statute. The remedy for any alleged abuse of MCOCA lies in the trial court or by challenging the sanction for prosecution. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 - Review Committee - The petitioner sought directions to establish a Review Committee under MCOCA to screen abuse of the Act, relying on Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab (TADA) and POTA (Amendment) Act, 2003. The Court held that MCOCA does not contain any provision for a Review Committee, and the directions in Kartar Singh were specific to TADA. The Court cannot legislate or add provisions to a statute. The petition was dismissed. (Paras 1-10) B) Constitutional Law - Article 226 - Power of High Court - The High Court cannot issue directions to create a Review Committee where the statute does not provide for one. The remedy for abuse of MCOCA lies in the trial court or by challenging the sanction. (Paras 8-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court can direct the State to establish a Review Committee under MCOCA on the lines of directions given by the Supreme Court in Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab for TADA and as incorporated in POTA (Amendment) Act, 2003, to screen abuse and misuse of MCOCA provisions.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The Court held that MCOCA does not provide for a Review Committee and the directions in Kartar Singh cannot be read into MCOCA. The remedy for abuse lies in the trial court or by challenging the sanction.
Law Points
- Review Committee
- MCOCA
- TADA
- POTA
- Article 226
- abuse of process
- statutory interpretation
