Special P. P. Smt.
Hereto annexed and marked as annexure Rl/1 is the companyy of MA No.260 of 2006 in remand application No.
4.5.2007 Bombay High Court passed present impugned companymon order in Criminal Appeal No.736 of 2006 and Criminal Appeal No.996 of 2006 thereby rejecting prayer for bail under Section 21 2 b of the MCOC Act, r.w.
It had been prayed in the appeal that the appellants be released on bail in LAC No.
The first order, granting extension was passed on 7.8.2006 and the extension of 15 days so granted was to expire on 21.8.2006.
Against Accused No.20 fourth chargesheet came to be filed which bear MCOC Special Case No.
52 of 2006 was prayed to be quashed and set aside, with the prayer that the appellants be released on suitable bail on default of the prosecution in filing the charge sheet within the specified period of 90 days.
32 of 2006 on technical ground under section 21 of MCOC Act thereby only companytending that The applicants state that there is numberprovision under section 21 of the MCOC Act for extension of period for the second time after it has been granted initially for the first time and therefore, after the first extended period for filing chargesheet having expired the applicants have become entitled for their release on bail on account of default in filing chargesheet within the extended period granted under section 21 of MCOC Act.
The charge sheet has been filed on 4.9.2006.
The bail application was preferred by the accused Nos.
736 of 2006 filed by the original accused number.
Criminal Appeal No.
4.9.2006 For the first time present petitioners accused Nos.
16C/2006.
5 to 8 before MCOC Special Court, Mumbai accordingly MCOC Special Case No.
17/ 2006 dated 21.8.2006 filed by Special PP Smt.
Investigation Officer ACP Dhawale filed first chargesheet on 4.9.2006 against 16 accused including present petitioners accused Nos.
The second application for extension was preferred by the prosecutor on 21.8.2006 seeking further extension and the Special Court granted extension upto 4.9.2006.
Therein the companytentions raised in Criminal Appeal No.736 of 2006 were also responded.
Rohini Salian filed separate application bearing MA No.260 of 2006 in Remand Application No.
Against accused Nos.
260 of 2006 filed in Remand .Application No.
4.9.2006 Since charge sheet was filed on 4.9.2006 i.e. within extended time granted by MCOC Special Court, said fact is reflected in Roznama dated 4.9.2006.
5 to 8 challenging the order dated 21.8.2006 passed by the Special Court thereby granting second extension of 15 days to companyplete the investigation and to file the charge sheet.
As per the prosecution Criminal Appeal 736 of 2006 would number survive after disposal of the bail application No.32 of 2006 by the Special Court.
996 of 2006 has been presented on 7.10.2006 before the High companyrt i.e. after the charge sheet was filed.
17 of 2006 dated 3.8.2006 filed by Special Public Prosecutor Smt.
ACP Dhawale filed detailed affidavit in reply in Criminal Appeal No.996 of 2006 before the Bombay High Court.
4.9.2006 Within the period extended by MCOC Special Court, companycerned.
Whereas in Criminal Appeal No.
5 to 8 filed bail application No.
The bail application came to be rejected.
18 and 19 third chargesheet came to be filed which bear MCOC Special Case No.16B/2006.
7.10.2006 Challenging order dated 4.9.2006 in Bail application N0.32 of 2006, accused No.
17 of 2006 for extension of period of filing of chargesheet by another 30 days.
14.5.2006 Present petitioners were produced before Additional M.M. 2nd companyrt, Mazgaon and remanded to PCR Upto 24.5.2006 22.5.2006 Competent Authority with due application of mind granted prior approval order under Section 23 1 a of MCOC Act, 1999 to the present offence and accordingly provisions of MCOC Act came to be applied to present offence.
first chargesheet dated 4.9.2006.
5 to 8 under section 12 of the Act, the order of extension passed by the Special Court on 7.8.2001 in MA No.
13.5.2006 Present Petitioners i.e. Accused Nos.
Whereas 7 accused have been shown so far as absconding accused.
5 to 8, present petitioners filed Criminal Appeal No.996 of 2006 under Section 12 of MCOC Act 28.2.2007 I.0.
3 of 2006 on default of the prosecution in companypleting the investigation within the extended period granted upto 21.8.2006.
Accordingly Bail Application No.32 of 2006 came to be rejected by MCOC Special Court by well reasoned order.
16 of 2006 came to be registered.
5 to 8 were produced for further remand MCOC, special Court and they were granted remand as under PCR upto 6.6.2006 PCT upto 12.6.2006 MCR upto 21.6.2006 MCR upto 4.7.2006 MCR upto 17.7.2006 MCR upto 25.7.200h MCR upto 7.8.2006 3.8.2006 Before expiry of period of 90 days, special Public Prosecutor, Smt.
24.5.2006 Thereafter, Petitioners accused Nos.
5 to Accused No.8 namely Javed Ahmed, Mustak Ahmed, Afzal Khan and Riyaz Ahmed came to be arrested.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court holding that the order dated 4.9.2006 passed by learned Special Judge in bail application No.32 of 2006 filed in remand application No.17 of 2006 suffers from numberinfirmity.
It is number out of place to point out that thereafter, against accused No.
Criminal Appeal No.996 of 2006 was filed under Section 12 of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 in short the Act .
17 second chargesheet was filed which bear MCOC Special Case No.16A/2006.
