Case Note & Summary
The applicants, police officers Dattatraya Krishnaji Ghule and Hitendra Manohar Vichare, were arrested on 08-10-2004 in connection with RC.10/2004/EOU-IV/New Delhi, which originated from Crime No.131/2001 of Police Station, Thane Nagar. The case involved seizure of counterfeit revenue stamps and share transfer stamps worth Rs.51,390/- on 16-05-2001. Initially investigated by Thane Crime Branch, the matter was transferred to CBI, which uncovered serious involvement of the applicants in aiding and abetting an organized crime syndicate headed by Abdul Karim Ladsab Telgi. The prosecution alleged that the police officers knowingly allowed the syndicate to flourish, fabricated evidence, and made false recoveries to protect the main culprits. The applicants faced charges under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, Bombay Stamps Act, Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act, 1999 (MCOCA), and Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. As the 90-day period following arrest was about to expire, the Special Public Prosecutor submitted a report under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. read with Section 21(2) MCOCA requesting extension of detention to complete investigation and file the final report. The Special Judge permitted continued detention beyond 90 days. Aggrieved, the applicants filed Criminal Application Nos. 1202/2005, 1048/2005, and 1666/2005 before the Bombay High Court challenging the trial court’s order. The High Court heard the applications together and reserved judgment. However, the available portion of the judgment ends abruptly before any decision or reasoning was recorded, leaving the outcome and legal principles unstated.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order passed by the Special Judge under MCOCA Act, Pune permitting further continued detention of the accused beyond the period of 90 days was legal and proper.
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (04) 87
Criminal Application No.1202 of 2005, Criminal Application No.1048 of 2005, Criminal Application No.1666 of 2005
S.P. Kadam, S.R. Pasbola, A.S. Gadkari, P.D. Gharat
Dattatraya Krishnaji Ghule and Hitendra Manohar Vichare
The State of Maharashtra and C.B.I.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal application challenging trial court order permitting continued detention beyond 90 days for submission of final report.
Remedy Sought
The applicants (accused police officers) sought setting aside of the order of continued detention and release on bail.
Filing Reason
The accused were arrested on 08-10-2004 and the 90-day period was to expire; the Special Public Prosecutor filed a report seeking extension of detention; the trial court permitted continued detention; the applicants challenged that order.
Previous Decisions
The trial court (Special Judge under MCOCA Act, Pune) permitted further continued detention of the accused up to a specified date.
Judgment Excerpts
The Applicants - Accused - by these Applications have challenged the order passed by the trial Court (Special Judge under M.C.O.C.Act, Pune) permitting further continued detention of the accused upto specified date, so as to enable the prosecution to submit final report with documents and its copies.
As ninety days were likely to expire after the arrest of the Applicants on 8th October 2004, the Public Prosecutor submitted his report to the Special Judge in terms of proviso to sub-section (2) of section 167 of the Cr.P.C., read with section 21(2) of the MCOCA for extending the period to submit final report.
The investigation by CBI disclosed that the present offence is the part of the conspiracy and the criminal activity of accused A.K.L. Telgi and his associates to counterfeit stamps and stamp papers and to dupe the government and the State Exchequer to the tune of thousands of crores of Rupees.
Procedural History
The applicants were arrested on 08-10-2004 in connection with RC.10/2004/EOU-IV/New Delhi, originally Crime No.131/2001 of P.S. Thane Nagar. After investigation by Thane Crime Branch, charge sheets were filed against several accused. The case was transferred to CBI, which uncovered the alleged involvement of the applicants. As the 90-day period for filing final report was to expire, the Special Public Prosecutor filed a report under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. read with Section 21(2) MCOCA seeking extension. The Special Judge allowed continued detention. The applicants challenged that order before the High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 120-B, 109, 216, 218, 255, 259, 260, 261, 262, 263, 263-A, 420, 471, 341
- Bombay Stamps Act, 1958: 63(a), 63(b)
- Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act, 1999: 3(1)(I)ii), 3(2), 3(4), 3(5), 4, 24, 21(2)
- Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988: 7, 12, 13(2) read with 13(1)(d)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 167(2)
