Full Text
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.299 OF 2022
Munib Memon
Aged: 38 years, Occu: Tailor.
Flat No. 24, 4th
Floor, Global Heights, Kondwa, Pune.
(Presently in Judicial Custody ...Appellant
At Mumbai Central Prison, Mumbai) (Orig. Accused No.5)
(At the instance of ATS, Mumbai) (Orig. Complainant)
Mr. Mubin Solkar a/w Mr. Aamir Sopariwala i/b Ms. Tahera Qureshi, for the Appellant.
Mr. Vaibhav Bagade, Special P.P. a/w Mr. A. R. Kapadnis, A.P.P for the
Respondent – State.
ASI – Mohan Dongare, Anti Terrorism Squad, Pune Unit.
JUDGMENT
1. By this appeal preferred under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, the appellant seeks his enlargement
N. S. Chitnis 1/29 on bail in connection with C.R. No. 9 of 2012 registered with the Anti Terrorism Squad Police Station (‘ATS’), Mumbai (Original C.R. No.168 of 2012, registered with the Deccan Police Station, Pune), for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 307, 435 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code; Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act; Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act; Sections 16(1)(b), 18, 20, 23, 38 and 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act of 1967 as amended in 2008; and, under Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (‘MCOC Act').
2. Learned Counsel for the appellant seeks bail on merits, on parity, as well as, on the ground of delay in the commencement of the trial i.e. the appellant having undergone pre-trial detention of about 9 years and 9 months.
3. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was working with accused No.3 – Firoz @Hamza Abdul Hameed Sayyed in his tailoring shop and that the appellant had no
N. S. Chitnis 2/29 role to play in the commission of the offence. He submits that even the Sim Card allegedly purchased by the appellant was purchased at the behest of accused No.3 – Firoz @Hamza i.e. the appellant's employer. He submits that even the alleged chit/s found with the appellant containing 2 emails, was/were given by the accused No.3 – Firoz @Hamza to the appellant. He submits that infact, there was no good reason for the appellant to keep the said chit/s containing 2 emails for 3 months, after the arrest of accused No.3 – Firoz @Hamza and that the possibility of the police planting the chit/s could not be ruled out. He submits that even otherwise, nothing turns on the said chit/s, inasmuch as, there is no material brought on record, by the investigating agency to show that the said 2 emails were used or any mail was sent or exchanged between the accused. Learned counsel further submits that admittedly the appellant was not amongst the accused who planted the bombs at Deccan Gymkhana, even according to the prosecution. He further submits that there is no material to show that the appellant had the requisite knowledge, that the accused No.3 – Firoz @Hamza alongwith others had planned/conspired to
N. S. Chitnis 3/29 plant bombs nor is there any material to show that the appellant was a part of the criminal conspiracy hatched by the accused to plant bombs. He submits that the appellant has no antecedents and that except for the present case, there is no case registered as against the appellant. According to Mr. Solkar, learned counsel for the appellant in the Delhi Case, which is registered against some of the accused, the appellant is shown as a witness in the said case. He submits that it is the prosecution case, that the said bomb blasts were planned to avenge the death of one Quatil Siddique, a member of a banned terrorist organization, Indian Mujahideen, who died in the jail custody on 8th June 2012. He submits that if this was the reason for planning the blasts i.e. to avenge the death of Quatil Siddique, who died on 8th June 2012, there was no reason for purchasing Sim Cards on bogus documents between the period January 2012 to August 2012 i.e. much prior to the death of Quatil Siddique. He submits that admittedly the bogus documents have not been prepared by the appellant and that the only allegation as against the appellant is that he purchased a Sim Card, which was at the behest of his employer i.e. accused No.3 –
N. S. Chitnis 4/29
4. Mr.Solkar further submits that the appellant is in custody since his arrest i.e. since 26th December 2012, for over 9 years. He submits that charge was framed in the said case on 25th May 2022 and that there is no prospect of the trial commencing in the immediate near future. He submits that even otherwise, the prosecution intends to examine 107 witnesses, which will take some time and as such the appellant be enlarged on bail, having regard to the fact, that the appellant has been incarcerated for over 9 years.
5. Learned Counsel for the appellant in this regard relied on the judgments in Shaheen Welfare Association v/s Union of India and Others[1]; Union of India v/s K. A. Najeeb[2]; The National Investigation Agency v/s Areeb Ejaz Majeed[3]; Iqbal Ahmed Kabir Ahmed v/s The State of Maharashtra[4]; Ashim Alias Asim Kumar Haranath
N. S. Chitnis 5/29
Bhattacharya Alias Asim Harinath Bhattacharya Alias Aseem Kumar Bhattacharya v/s National Investigation Agency[5]; Thwaha Fasal v/s Union of India[6]; Afroz Firoz Mujawar @ Dastagir v/s The State of Maharashtra[7]; Vikram Vinay Bhave S/o. Vinay Bhave v/s State of Maharashtra and Anr.8; Jahir Hak v/s The State of Rajasthan[9]; Sachin Atmaram Vartak v/s State of Maharashtra10; Sanjiv Shankarrao Khade v/s Republic of India (CBI)11; Ritu Pal v/s The State of Uttar Pradesh12; Vinod Solanki v/s Union of India and Another13 and Ramesh Bhavan Rathod v/s Vishanbhai Hirabhai Makwana (Koli) and Another14.
6. Learned Counsel for the appellant also sought bail on the ground of parity. He relied on the orders dated 17th March 2016
2022. 10 2022(1) Bom.C.R.(Cri.) 628 11 Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.4265/2021 decided on 24.08.2021
N. S. Chitnis 6/29 and 1st October 2015, by which co-accused viz. Sayed Arif Amil @Kashif Biyabani and Aslam Shabbir Sheikh @Bunty Jagirdar, were enlarged on bail.
7. Learned Special P.P. opposes the appeal. He submits that the appellant was part of the criminal conspiracy as is evident from the confessional statements of co-accused - Irfan Mustafa Landge (original accused No.4), Farooq Shaukat Bagwan (original accused No.6) and Firoz @Hamza Abdul Hameed Sayyed (original accused No.3) and as such had complete knowledge of the blasts. He submits that pursuant to the conspiracy hatched by the accused at the shop of the accused No.3 – Firoz @Hamza, each of the accused was handed over a particular job to perform, to achieve the said object/goal. He submits that as far as the appellant is concerned, he was assigned with the task of procuring a Sim Card based on bogus documents. He submits that the statement of one of the witness i.e. the shopkeeper will show that the appellant had gone and purchased the Sim Card from the shopkeeper on the basis of bogus/fabricated documents. He submits
N. S. Chitnis 7/29 that the CDR records also show that the appellant was in touch with the co-accused. Learned Special P.P relied on the confessional statements of co-accused – Irfan Landge, Farooq Bagwan and Firoz @Hamza Sayyed to show the complicity of the appellant and other material.
8. Perused the papers with the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties. The case pertains to five bomb blasts that took place in Pune City on 1st August, 2012 at around 7:00 p.m. in the areas of Deccan Gymkhana, Bal Gandharv Rang Mandir and other adjoining areas. A live bomb was also recovered from one of the spots. The bombs which were used in the commission of the offences were placed in bicycle baskets. All the bicycles were placed in one of the prominent business and crowded areas in Pune. Pursuant to the said five blasts that took place at various locations in Pune City, an FIR came to be lodged initially with the Deccan Police Station, Pune as against unknown persons. The offences alleged were Sections 307, 427 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code etc. Thereafter, the investigation
N. S. Chitnis 8/29 came to be transferred to the ATS, Mumbai. Nine persons came to be arrested in connection with the aforesaid offences and some accused are stated to be still absconding. It is the prosecution case, that the said bomb blasts were planned by the accused with the intent of striking terror in the minds of the people and for causing deaths/injuries to persons and/or causing loss or damage or destruction of property. It is the prosecution case, that the said bomb blasts were planned to avenge the death of one Quatil Siddique, a member of a banned terrorist organization, Indian Mujahideen. We may note here, that Quatil Siddique was arrested in connection with the conspiracy to commit bomb blast at Dagadu Sheth Ganpati Mandir in Pune. In connection with the said case, Quatil Siddique was arrested and was lodged at Yerwada Central Jail, Pune, where he was murdered by two persons, whilst in jail. It is the prosecution case, that to avenge the death of Quatil Siddique, the members of the Indian Mujahideen, a banned terrorist organization, acting as an organized crime syndicate conspired to cause bomb blasts, in Pune City. It is alleged by the prosecution, that initially there was a plan to kill the assailants of
N. S. Chitnis 9/29
Quatil Siddique when they were brought to Court, by firing at them, however, as the said plan could not be executed, it was decided to cause bomb blasts.
9. In order to consider whether the prosecution has prima facie established the connection of the appellant with the alleged offences or not, it would be necessary to consider the material that has come on record qua the appellant. We may note here, that admittedly even according to the prosecution, the appellant was not amongst the accused, who planted the bombs in bicycles on 1st August, 2012. The role of the appellant is spelt out by the co-accused - Irfan Mustafa Landge (original accused No.4), Farooq Bagwan (original accused No.6) and Firoz @Hamza Sayyed (original accused No.3) in their confessional statement, recorded under Section 18 of the MCOC Act on 9th January, 2013. Certain relevant paragraphs of the said confessional statements, are being reproduced hereinuder, which are relevant for consideration of the aforesaid appeal:- Irfan Mustafa Landge (original accused No.4) “….. …..
N. S. Chitnis 10/29 …. ….. ge vyx&vyx eksckbZy Qksuls fj;kt HkVdy ls pWVhax dh tjh, laidZ esa Fks];g ckr geus dk”khQ dks crk;hA eSa esjs eksckbZy Qksu ua- 8855003123 vkSj 8446921781 ds tjh, vln [kku] bejku [kku] fQjkst l¸;n] equhc eseu] Qk:[k ckxoku vkSj dk”khQ fc;kckuh ds laidZ esa FkkA tqu 2012 esa bafM;u eqtkfgnnhu la?kVu ds drhy fl/nhdh dk;sjoMk tsy esa 'kjn eksgG vkSj vyksd Hkkysjko us dry fd;k FkkA ….. ….. ysfdu fj;kt HkVdy vkSj QS;kt dkx>h us ges iquk vkSj cacbZ esa cEc CykLV djds drhy fl/nhdh ds dry dk cnyk ysuk pkfg,],Sls crk;kA mlh nkSjku fj;kt HkVdy us ges iquk esa cacbZ dh rjQokys byk[ks esa HkkMsls ?kj ysus dks dgk FkkA eS] vln vkSj bejku iquk esa fQjkst ds “Option by Firoz” diMksadks nqdku esa x, A ml nqdku ds dsfcu esa geus fQjkst] equhc vkSj Qk:d dks;g ckr crk;hA oks rhuks Hkh bl dke ds fy, rS;kj gks x, A mlh oDr vln us fQjkst vkSj eq>s fiaijh bykds esa HkkMs ls:e ysus dks dgkA vln [kku ds dsgus ds eqrkchd cEc CykLV ds dke ds fy, cksxl fledkMZ ds isij cukus dh ftEesnkjh Qk:d ds mij lkSih x;h vkSj eksckbZy Qksu vkSj fledkMZl [kjhnusdh ftEesnkjh equhc eseu dks lkSih x;hA mlds ckn ge rhuks okil pys vk;s A ….. vln dk gqyh;k vkSj jsgsu&lsgsu eqfLyeksads tSls gkssus dh otgls fj;ky HkVdy us fp<dj vln dks dklkjokMh okys:eij tkus dks euk dj fn;kA bl oDr Qk:d ckxoku us cuk, gq, cksxl MkWD;qesUVl ls fQjkst us equhc eseu ds tjh,
N. S. Chitnis 11/29 fledkMZl ykdj eq>s fn, FksA ….. ml fnu ls 23 tqykbZ 2012 ds 'kke rd ge pkjksaus feydj vkSj 3 cEc cuk,A tc ge yksx cEc cuk jgs Fks ml oDr vgen dWf”kvks okWp [kksydj Vk;ej lfdZV cuk jgk FkkA bl nkSjku vgen dk nqljk uke odkl vkSj 'kkdhj dk nqljk uke rcjst gS];g ckr eq>s ekywe iMh FkhA 'kkdhj vkSj vgen yWiVkWi dk bLrseky djrs Fks vkSj equhc us fn;s gq, vk”kk 200 eksckbZy Qksu ls fj;kt HkVdy vkSj bdcky HkVdy ls pWfVax djrs FksA Firoz @Hamza Abdul Hameed Sayyed (original accused No.3) ….. ….. lu 2006 esa rkcqr fLVªV ij diMs ds dke ds fy, eSaus,d dkj[kkuk fdjk;s ls fy;k FkkA Vsyfjax ds dke ds fy, eSaus lWusxkWu fLVªV] dWEi es,d cMk dkj[kkuk HkkMsls fy;k FkkA blh dke es esjh ^^gqnk Vsyj** dh nqdku pykusokys equhc eseu ls lu 2006 es isgpku gqbZ FkhA esjs nqdku vkSj dkj[kkus dh dk djus vDlj vkrk FkkA ….. ….. eSaus Hkh eqlyekuksaij gks jgs vR;kpkj dk cnyk ysus ds fy, ftgkn djus dk QSlyk fd;kA lu 2008 ds flracj;k vDVqcj es vlhQ 'ks[k] vdcj pkS/kjh] vkfrd] ekthn vkSj dkQh lkjs yMds cEc CykLV ds xqukgksa esa idMs x;sA eSaus vCnqy erhu dks bdcky vkSaj fj;kt HkVdy ds ckjs esa iqNk] rc mlus eq>s bdcky vkSaj fj;kt HkVdy
N. S. Chitnis 12/29 us iquk esa vkuk can dj fn;k gSa],Sls crk;kA ml oDr fj;kt HkVdy vkSj muds lc lkFkh baMh;u eqtkfgnnhu la?kVu ds fy, dke djrs gS];g ckr eq>s ekywe iMhA blh nkSjku vCnqy erhu us esjs nqdku es dke djuk NksM fn;k FkkA Ekquhc eseu iquk esa isgys fleh la?kVu ds fy, dke djrk FkkA equhc ds nksLr bErh;kt 'ks[k dks,-Vh-,l- us lu 2008 esa fxjQrkj fd;k FkkA equhc dk nqdku u pyus dh otg ls eSaus lu 2009 esa mls esjs dkj[kkus es dkeij j[kkA equhc dks feyus lknhd dqjs”kh vkSj fy;kdr esjs dkj[kkusij vkSj nqdkuij vkrs FksA equhc dh lksp Hkh ftgknh FkhA dk esa jsgusokyk HkkbZ iquk esa vkdj gedks feyrk FkkA ml oDr eSa] lehj >saMsokyk] vCnqy erhu] Qk:d] ] lSQ vkSj equhc ges”kk ftgkn dh ckrs djrs FksA eSa vkSj equhc ikfdLrku ds bdcky fdykuh dh ftgknh fdrkcsa baVjusVls MkmuyksM djds mldh fizaV fudkydj i<rs FksA Lku 2009 esa us esjh bjQku ykaMxs] vln [kku vkSj bejku [kku ls eqykdkr djok;hA rc eq>s;g pkjks Hkh vkSjaxkckn ds dk”khQ fc;kckuh ds lkFk esa gS],sls ekywe iMkA bjQku ds dgusls vWMOgksdsV 'kkghn vk>eh dh eMZj dk cnyk ysus ds fy, eSaus MsDdu] iquk es jgusokys izKk lk/koh ds odhy ds ckjs esa iqquk dksVZ es tkdj ekywekr fudkyh Fkh vkSj;g ckr eSus bjQku dks crkbZ FkhA esjs yMds getk dks vgenuxj es enjls esa i<us ds fy, eSaus Hkstk FkkA blfy, eSa vDlj vgenuxj tkrk FkkA ml oDr eSa] bjQku dks feyrk FkkA eq>s vkSj equhc dks esa gkQht lkgc ls feyk;k FkkA gkQht lkgc us ges ftgkn ds ckjs eas dkQh lkjs ckrs crkbZ FkhA ml
N. S. Chitnis 13/29 oDr gkQht lkgc ckaXykns”k tkrs gS];g ckr eq>s ekywe iMhA ….. ….. QS;kt us gekjs xzqi dk vkehj vln dks cukdj ge lcdks dk”khQ vkSj vln ds dgus ds eqrkchd dke djuk],Sls crk;kA eSa] vln vkSj bjQku bafM;k ykSVus ds ckn bejku [kku lkSnh tkdj QS;kt dkx>h ls feydj vk;kA QS;kt ds dsgus ds eqrkchd eSuas] equhc] lehj Qk:d vkSj lSQ dks ftgkn ds ckjs esas crkdj eS Hkh viuk vyx xzqi cukus dh dksf”k”k esa FkkA blds ckn bjQku] vln vkSj bejku iquk vkdj eq>s feyus yxsA rc mudh esj ikl dke djus okys equhc vkSj Qk:d ls isgpku gqbZ FkhA eS ml nkSjku QS;kt dkx>h ls vyx&vyx ek/;eksals pWVhax dj jgk FkkA QS;kt dkx>h ftgknh ekeys esa [kkl liksVZ ugh dj jgk FkkA blfy,;g ckr ge yksxksaus dk”khQ fc;kckuh dks crkbZA QS;kt dkx>hus ge lcdks fj;kt HkVdy ds dkWUVWDV esa Hkstk FkkA eSa] vln] bejku vkSj bjQku vDlj QS;kt vkSj fj;kt ls vyx&vyx pWVhax djds dkWUVWDV esa FksA ml oDr ge lcdks dk”khQ fc;kckuh dh otg ls fj;kt HkVdy vPNh rjg ls isgysls isgpkurk gS];g ckr ges ekywe iMhA fj;kt ls pWVhax djrs oDr mlus ges fuEcql lkWQVosvj vkSj viuk vk;-Mh Nqikus ds fy, fdl rjg ls socks24.org;qt djrs gS blds ckjs esa tkudkjh nh FkhA fj;kt us eq>s mldh vyx&vyx vk;-Mh nh FkhA og eSus fy[kdj yh FkhA mlesa ls dqN fy[kh gqbZ vk;-Mh- eSus equhc dks nh FkhA eSa esjs eksckbZy Qksu ua- 9370623403 vkSj 9970335179 ds tfj, vln] bjQku] bejku] equhc vkSj Qk:d ds laidZ esa FkkA vkSj esa esjs mark.tailor81@yahoo.com bl bZesy vk; Mh ls QS;kt dkx>h
N. S. Chitnis 14/29 ds hi.dudes86@yahoo.com bl bZesy vk; Mh ij vkSj esS rockcharles912@yahoo.com bl bZesy vkMh ls fj;kt HkVdy ds lovelyhunk34@yahoo.com bl bZesy vk;-Mh- ij dkWUVWDV esa FkkA blds flok esaus dkQh lkjh bZesy vk;-Mh dk eSus muls pWVhax ds fy, bLrseky fd;kA pWVhax djrs oDr ge dksM uke ls ckr djrs FksA blh nkSjku eSus fnlacj 2011 esa pWVhax ds tjh, vCnqy erhu dk uacj QS;kt dkx>h dks fn;k FkkA tuojh 2012 esa bjQku us eq>s cksxl fledkMZ nsus ds fy, dgk FkkA blfy, eSus Qk:d ls cksxl MkD;qesaUV cuokdj og MkD;qesaUVls equhc ds tjh,,d cksxl fledkMZ ykdj bjQku dks fn;k FkkA mlh nkSjku fj;kt HkVdy us dqN efguksads fy, bjQku dks HkkMsls ?kj ysus dks dgk FkkA blfy, eSuas vkSj bjQku us yksuh izojk esa,d HkkMsls ?kj fy;k FkkA mlds dqN fg fnuks esa bjQku fj;kt us Hksts gq, 'kkdhj uke ds vkneh dks iquk ls ysdj yksuh ds ?kj ij NksM dj vk;k FkkA ekpZ 2012 esa QS;kt dkx>h ds cqykusls eS lkSnh pyk x;k FkkA ml oDr QS;kt dkx>h us esjh mlds Qksu ls fj;kt HkVdy ls ckr djok;h FkhA bafM;k ykSVus ds ckn fj;kt HkVdy ds dsgus ls ge yksxksus vkardoknh dkjok;h ds fy, caVh tkfxjnkj ls 2 fiLVy ysdj bejku ds ikl j[ks FksA 8 twu 2012 dks gekjs la?kVus ds drhy fl/nhdh dk;sjoMk tsy es 'kjn eksgG vkSj vyksd Hkkysjko us dry fd;k FkkA QS;kt dkx>h vkSj fj;kt HkVdy dks bl ckr dk dkQh xqLLkk vk;k FkkA mUgksus bl dry dk cnyk ysuk pkfg,],Sls gesa crk;kA bl ckr dk cnyk ysus ds fy, eSus bjQku dks 30 gtkj:Ik;s nsdj mls vkSj 1 fiLVy ykus dks dgkA mlds eqrkchd
N. S. Chitnis 15/29 bjQku us vkSj 1 fiLVy yk;kA eSus vkSj bejku us drhy fl/nhdh dks ekjus okys 'kjn vkSj vyksd ds ckjs esa tkudkjh fudkyh FkhA dksVZ esa flD;qfjVh dh otgls dke djuk eqf”dy gS],Sls geus fj;kt vkSj QS;kt dks crk;kA fQj ge yksxksaus 'kjn eksgG vkSj vkyksd Hkkysjko ds ifjokj okyks ds mij vVWd djus dk vkSj;sjoMk tsy ls dksVZ es ysdj tkrs oDr muds mij Qk;jhax djus dk Iyku fd;k FkkA ij ges,Sls dke djuk eqf”dy yx jgk FkkA;g ckr geus fj;kt vkSj QS;kt dks crkbZ FkhA blh nkSjku eSus esjs iklokys 2 fiLVy Qk:d dks vius nqdku es fn[kk, FksA,d fnu vpkud vln] bjQku vkSj bejku gekjs nqdkuij vk,A ml oDr nqdku es esjs lkFk equhc vkSj Qk:d gkthj FksA ge lc nqdku ds dschu esS cSBs FksA ml oDr vln us gesa,Sls crk;k fj;kt HkVdy vkSj QS;kt dkx>h us ges iquk vkSjs cacbZ esa cEc CykLV djds drhy fl/nhdh ds dry dk cnyk ysuk pkfg,,sls crk;k gSA ge lc bl dke ds fy, rS;kj gks x;sA mlh oDr vln us eq>s vkSj bjQku dks fiaijh bykds esa HkkMs ls:e ysus dks dgk vkSj cksxl fledkMZ ds isij cukus dh ftEesnkjh Qk:d ds mij lkSih xbZ vkSj eksckbZy Qksu vkSj fledkMZl [kfjnusdh ftEesnkjh equhc eseu dks lkSaih xbZ FkhA mlds ckn vln] bjQku vkSj bejku ogk ls pys x;sA drhy fl/nhdh ds dry dk cnyk ysus dk Iyku equhc eseu us ih-,Qvk;- ds lknhd dqjs”kh dks crk;k FkkA tuojh 2012 ls vxLr 2012 rd esjs dsgusij Qk:d ckxoku us fganw ds uke ls djhc 8 cksxl MkWD;qesaUV cuokdj eq>s fn, FksA eSus og MkWD;qesUVl equhc dks nsdj mlds tjh, iquk ds
N. S. Chitnis 16/29 vyx&vyx nqdkuksls fledkMZ [kfjns FksA equhc us fn, gq, fledkMZ bjQku] vln] bejku] 'kkdhj] vgen vkSj eSus bLrseky fd, A ….. ….. ogk ij eSus equhc vkSj Qk:d dks cqykdj nqljs fnu esjk eksckbZy Qksu ?kj ls ysdj nqdkuij ykdj pkyw j[kuk],sls crkdj fdlh dk Qksu vkrk gS rks muls ckr djuk],Sls crk;k FkkA eSus Qk:d vkSj equhc dks Iyku ds eqrkchd viuk dke iqjk gh tk,xk,Sls crkdj mijokys ls nqokWa djus dks dgkA tc eS nqdkuij vk;k rc Qk:d esjk bartkj dj jgk FkkA ml oDr equhc esjk eksckbZy ysdj bQrkjh ds fy, mlds ?kj dksa<ok pyk x;k Fkk],Sls eq>s Qk:d us crk;kA eSus equhc dks Qksu djds rqjar nqdkuij vkus dks dgkA equhc nqdkuij vkus ds ckn eSus esjk eksckbZy Qksu esjs ikl fy;k vkSj fQj yWiVkWi ij fVOgh pkyw dh;kA eS] equhc vkSj Qk:d fVOgh ns[k jgs FksA rc taxyh egkjkt jksMij fljh;y cEc CykLV dh [kcjs vk jgh FkhA bl ?kVuk ds djhc 2;k 3 fnuds ckn esa dklkjokMh QyWVij tkdj ogk ls 2 fiLVy] jkmaM] ftysVhu LVhDl] lksYMªhax e”khu dVj] crZu tWdsV] eksckbZy Qksu vkSj QWu ysdj ogkW ls fudykA vkWVks ls vkrs oDr eqYkk unh ds fcztij eSus 'kkdhj vkSj vgen us bLreky fd;k gqvk eksckbZy Qksu unh esa Qsad fn;kA ?kj ij vkus ds ckn esjs ikl okyk,DlIyksf>Og eSus Qk:d dks fn[kk;k FkkA Farooq Shaukat Bagwan (original accused No.6) ….. ….. fQjkst l¸;n QW”ku fM>kbZfuax dk dke djrk
N. S. Chitnis 17/29
FkkA blh nkSjku esjh fQjkst ds nqdku esa dke djusaokys dVhax ekLVj equhc eseu ls isgpku gqbZ FkhA bl nkSjku vCnqy erhu fQjkst ds nqdku esa dke djrk FkkA lu 2007 esa fQjkst gt ds fy, lkSnh pyk x;k FkkA fQjkst lkSnh ls vkus ds ckn eq>s vgy&,&gnhl ds ckjs es crkdj mldks viukuk pkfg,],slh ckrs djrk FkkA gekjs dkj[kkus ds vkSj nqdku dh e”khu ds esUVuUl dk dke djrk FkkA dk eSa jgsusokyk HkkbZ iquk esa vkdj gedks feyrk FkkA ml oDr es]a fQjkst] equhc] lSQ] vCnqy efru vkSj ges”kk ftgkn dh ckrs djrs FksA ebZ 2011 es fQjkst gt ds cgkus lkSnh tkdj QS¸;kt dkx>h dks feydj vk;kA lkSnh ls vkus ds ckn fQjkst l¸;n eq>s vkSj equhc dks ges”kk ckcjh efLtn] xqtjkr naxs] tEew df”ej vkSj vQxkf.kLrku esa eqlyekuksaij py jgs tqYe ds ckjs eS vdlj crkdj ftgkn djuk t:jh gS],sls crkrk FkkA equhc vkSj fQjkst gekjs nqdku ds baVjusV ds tjh, ikfdLrku dh ftgknh cqDl MkÅuyksM djds mudh fizUV fudkyrs FksA og lc fdrkcs ge yksx i<rs FksA dkj[kkus es equhc dks feyus vkSj vkrs FksA esjs ikl ls je>ku ds iWEIysVl fizUV djds ysdj tkrk FkkA lu 2012 dh 'kq:okrls fQjkst ds dgusls esa mldks fganw uke ls cksxl oksaVhx dkMZ dh fizUV nsrk FkkA mlds tjh, fQjkst equhc dh enr ls fledkMZ [kjhndj og cksxl fledkMZ fQjkst vkSj mlds nksLr bLreky djrs FksA tqu 2012 eSa;sjoMk tsy es bafM;u eqtkfgnhu la?kVu ds dfry fl|hdh dk dry
N. S. Chitnis 18/29 gksus ds ckn,d fnu vpkud vln] bjQku] bejku gekjs nqdkuij vk;sA ml oDr dsfcu esa eS]a equhc vkSj fQjkst FksA ml oDr iquk vkSj eqacbZ es CykLV djds dfry fl|hdh dk cnyk ysus dk Iyku fd;k x;k FkkA ml oDr fQjkstus eq>s fledkMZl ds fy, cksxl MkWD;qesaV cukus dk dke fn;k FkkA mlds dqN fnu ds ckn fQjkst us gekjs nqdku es eq>s 2 fiLVy fn[kkdj drhy fl|hdh dk ge yksx cnyk ysusokys gS],sls eq>s dgkA dfry fl|hdh ds cnys dh ckr equhc us mlds nksLr dks crkbZ FkhA tuojh 2012 ls vxLV 2012 es fganw uke ds 6 ls 7 cksxl MkWD;qesaV eSus fQjkst dks fn;s FksA ml cksxl MkWD;qesaVls equhc eseu us iquk ds vyx&vyx nqdkuksls fledkMZ [kjhndj fQjkst dks ykdj fn;s FksA djhc 17 ls 20 tqykbZ 2012 ds ckn fQjkst us nqdku es vkuk de dj fn;k FkkA 31 tqykbZ 2012 dh jkr esa fQjkst us eq>s vkSj equhc dks cqykdj],sls crk;k dh] ^^Iyku ds eqrkfcd oks dy iqjk fnu dke ls ckgj jgsaxk] blfy, Qk:d mlds llqjky eSa tkdj mldk eksckbZy Qksu ysdj og eksckbZy Qksu equhc dks nsxkA oks okil vkus rd equhc oks eksckbZy Qksu mlds ikl gh pkyw j[ksxkA**,sls crkdj fQjkst ogk ls pyk x;kA 1 vxLr 2012 dks equhc us esjs isgysgh tkdj fQjkst dk eksckbZy Qksu gekjs nqdkuij yk;k FkkA bQrkjh ds fy, equhc fQjkst dk eksckbZy Qksu ysdj mlds ?kj dksaMok pyk x;k FkkA 'kke dks fQjkst nqdkuij vk;kA mlus rqjar equhc dks Qksu djds mldk eksckbZy Qksu ysdj nqdku ij cqyk;kA fQjkst us nqdku ds yWiVkWi ij fVOgh pkyw dj fn;k FkkA mlh oDr equhc Hkh nqdku
N. S. Chitnis 19/29 ij vk;k FkkA ge fruks fV-Ogh ns[k jgs Fks] rc taxyh egkjkt jksM] iqus esa cEc CykLV dh U;qt py jgh FkhA djhc 3;k 4 vxLr 2012 dks fQjkst us eq>s,d isij es yiVk gqvk iklZy fn[kkdj mles,DlIyksf>Og gSa],Sls crk;k FkkA vkSj fdlh dks irk uk pys,sls crk;k FkkA 26 fnlacj 2012 dks iqfyl us eq>s iquk es vWjsLV fd;k FkkA
10. A perusal of the aforesaid confessional statements of coaccused recorded under Section 18 of the MCOC Act prima facie shows (i) that the appellant was a friend of Quatil Siddique, who was killed in jail custody; (ii) that the appellant was working with Firoz @Hamza (original accused No.3), in his tailoring shop (iii) that the appellant was present in the secret meeting which took place on 8th July 2012 at Firoz @Hamza's (original accused No.3) tailoring shop, when the conspiracy to plant bombs was hatched; (iv) that the appellant alongwith another co-accused i.e. Farooq Bagwan (original accused No.6), who was present in the said meeting had agreed to purchase SIM Cards by using fake documents; (v) that pursuant thereto, the appellant was assigned with the task of procuring bogus Sim Card based on fabricated documents prepared by some of the accused; (vi) that the appellant visited the shop and purchased the Sim
N. S. Chitnis 20/29
Card in the name of Mohsin Shaikh (vii) that the statement of the shopkeeper shows that the appellant had purchased the Sim Card in the name of Mohsin Shaikh (viii) that the said Sim Card was used in the commission of the offence; and (ix) that the appellant was entrusted to keep Farooq’s mobile with him, till Farooq’s return, post the blasts.
11. Although, the learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant was only an employee of accused No.3 – Firoz @Hamza and as such had no knowledge of the commission of the offence i.e. of bomb blasts and that as an employee, he only followed the diktat of accused No.3 – Firoz @Hamza and purchased the Sim Card, is prima facie belied from what is disclosed by co-accused - Irfan Landge, Farooq Bagwan and Firoz @Hamza Sayyed, in their confessional statement recorded under Section 18 of the MCOC Act. A perusal of Section 2(a) of the MCOC Act prima facie, would cover the act of the appellant. Section 2(a) of the MCOC Act defines the term ‘abet' as under:
N. S. Chitnis 21/29 “(a) "abet", with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions, includes,-
(i) the communication or association with any person with the actual knowledge or having reason to believe that such person is engaged in assisting in any manner, an organised crime syndicate; (ii) ….. ….. ….. ….. ….. ….. and
(iii) the rendering of any assistance, whether financial or otherwise, to the organised crime syndicate.”
12. The confession statements of co-accused - Irfan Mustafa Landge, Farooq Bagwan and Firoz @Hamza Sayyed, prima facie, shows the complicity of the appellant in the crime; that the appellant was present in the meeting of 8th July 2012; that he had knowledge of the acts to be committed; that the appellant in pursuance to the conspiracy, had been assigned a task i.e. to purchase Sim Card based on bogus documents; that the appellant purchased the Sim Card from the shop keeper; and that the Sim Card was used in the commission of the offence.
13. As far as the chit/s found with the appellant containing 2
N. S. Chitnis 22/29 email IDs is concerned, it appears that the same were found 3 months after the accused No.3 – Firoz @Hamza was arrested. It appears that the said chit/s was/were handed over by the accused No.3 – Firoz @Hamza to the appellant. No material with respect to the said email has been collected by the prosecution and as such prima facie, nothing turns on the seizure of the said chit/s from the appellant.
14. As far as CDR records are concerned, it appears that the appellant was in touch with the accused i.e accused Nos.[3] and two other accused. It appears from the investigation that during the period 1st January 2012 to 21st December 2012, the appellant was using the phone numbers standing in the name of his brother, Mushabbar Memon. During the said period, the appellant had called co-accused - Firoz @Hamza around 738 times (total), Irfan Landge 5 times and Farooq Bagwan 45 times.
15. Considering the confessional statements and what is stated aforesaid, prima facie, it is difficult to come to a conclusion that there
N. S. Chitnis 23/29 are no reasonable grounds for believing that the appellant is not guilty of the offences with which he is charged, as mandated by Section 21(4) of the MCOC Act. Similarly, the material on record shows that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against the appellant are prima facie true, and hence Section 43(D)(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, would also apply.
16. Considering the aforesaid, the appeal seeking bail on merits is rejected.
17. As far as parity is concerned, the ground of parity will not apply, inasmuch as, the grounds on which co-accused - Sayed Arif Amil @Kashif Biyabani and Aslam Shabbir Sheikh @Bunty Jagirdar, were enlarged on bail are completely different from that of the appellant and as such the ground of parity will not apply to the appellant.
18. As far as delay in commencement of the trial is concerned, it appears that charge was framed in the said case on 25th May 2022
N. S. Chitnis 24/29 and that the prosecution intends to examine about 107 witnesses. In this connection heavy reliance was placed on the judgment of the Apex Court in Shaheen Welfare Association (supra), in which the Apex Court considered the conflicting claims of personal liberty emanating from Article 21 of the Constitution of India and protection of the society from terrorist acts, which the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, professed to achieve. Whilst reconciling the two, the Apex Court issued directions for release of undertrial prisoners, who had suffered long incarceration, depending upon the gravity of the charges. The observations in paras 9 to 11 and 13 to 14 are material and hence reproduced hereinunder:-
19. Having regard to the gravity of the offence, the role of the appellant, the evidence qua him and the observations made by us as stated aforesaid, we also decline to consider the appellant’s plea for bail on the ground of delay in commencement of the trial. However, at the same time, we cannot be oblivious to the right of the appellant to an expeditious trial guaranteed to him under Article 21 of the Constitution of the India. Charges in this case were framed on 25th May 2022. Accordingly, we expedite the trial of the appellant and direct the learned Special Judge, to conclude the trial, as expeditiously as possible, and in any event by December 2023. All parties i.e. prosecution and defence to co-operate with the learned Judge in the
N. S. Chitnis 28/29 expeditious disposal of the trial.
20. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed and disposed of as such.
21. It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima facie, and the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.
22. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. N. S. Chitnis 29/29