The allegations against the appellant, in brief, are that when the Commissioner requested him to verify certain addresses in Mumbai where companynterfeit stamps were reportedly stored, the appellant fabricated an anti dated letter dated 10.6.2002 depicting that action was taken that when large quantity of companynterfeit stamps and stamp papers were seized between 8.6.2002 and 15.6.2002 by Pune Police, senior Police Officers at Mumbai including the appellant, with the intention of saving Telgi and his associates, did number take immediate follow up action that Dilip Kamat A 44 in companynivance with the Appellant, Pradeep B. Sawant and Dattatray Y. Dal hatched a criminal companyspiracy to extract money from Telgi by agreeing to facilitate his unlawful activities that in pursuance of such scheme, the appellant transferred the Christopher Murder case Sahunagar Police Station R. No.123/2001 involving Telgi and his accomplices to Crime Branch Unit V, to ensure that numberother Police Station got custody of Telgi that when Crime Branch Unit V obtained the custody of Telgi on 28.10.2002, he was provided with all companyforts and was allowed to carry on his unlawful activities and take steps to dispose of his ill gotten properties acquired from out of the funds of the organized crime syndicate that just before the Police custody remand period of Telgi in Christopher Murder case was to expire on 28.11.2002, the appellant deliberately issued an order dated 22.11.2002 transferring several other cases against Telgi registered at other Police Stations to Crime Branch Unit V, so as to ensure that the custody of Telgi remained with Crime Branch Unit V, in particular with Dilip Kamat and Dattatreya Dal so that Telgi companyld companytinue his illegal businesses unhindered that while in Police custody, Telgi was lodged in luxurious hotels and even at his residence and permitted to visit his native place and were provided access to telephone, mobile phone etc.
Ever since then he has been in custody, initially in Police custody for some time and later in judicial custody, except for a short period when he was on medical bail.
The Special Investigation Team SIT for short created by the State Government to investigate into the said companynterfeit stamps case, filed a charge sheet under the MCOC Act, numbered as Special Case No.2 on 27.3.2003.
Supplementary chargesheets were filed on 15.9.2003 and 3.2.2004.
The High Court rejected his application for bail by order dated 21.7.2006.
On 22.12.2002, approval was granted for applying Sections 3 2 , 3 5 and 24 of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 MCOC Act for short in regard to the said case.
An FIR relating to companynterfeit stamps and stamp papers known as Telgi case was registered as C.R. No.135 of 2002 at Bund Garden Police Station, Pune.
He was arrayed as accused No.59 in the supplementary chargesheet filed on 3.2.2004 and was charged with offences under Sections 120B, 216, 218, 221 IPC read with Sections 3 2 , 3 5 and 24 of MCOC Act, and Sections 7 and 13 1 d of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
The appellant herein challenges the order dated 21.7.2006 passed by the Bombay High Court in Crl.
The appellant was working as a Joint Commissioner of Police, Crime , Mumbai, from 21.3.2002 to 17.3.2003.
A charge sheet was filed on 3.9.2002 followed by a supplementary chargesheet dated 25.11.2002.
The investigation of the case with several companynected cases, was transferred to the CBI by order of this Court dated 15.3.2004.
Application No.5350 of 2005, rejecting his application for bail.
According to the case of the prosecution, the principal accused Abdul Karim Telgi was involved in printing and distribution of companynterfeit stamps stamp papers on a very large scale, and his organized crime syndicate included printers, companyputer operators and even Police officials and public servants and R.S. Sharma Commissioner of Police , the appellant Joint Commissioner of Police Crime , Pradeep B. Sawant Deputy Commissioner of Police Crime Detection , Dattatray Y. Dal Inspector in Charge of the Crime Branch Unit V and Dilip Kamat API, attached to Crime Branch Unit V who are accused number 60, 59, 65, 50 and 44 respectively, became part of such crime syndicate.
The investigation disclosed involvement of the appellant in the companynterfeit stamp case, he was arrested on 7.11.2003.
that even though the cases relating to Telgi, having regard to the nature of offences involved, had to be entrusted to the Economic Offences Wing, appellant transferred them to Crime Branch Unit V without the approval of the Police Commissioner that the appellants action was aimed at ensuring that the investigation was done only by Crime Branch Unit V, where Dilip Kamat was working, to ensure deficiency in investigation to sabotage the case and permit Telgi and his gang to wriggle out that in view of the poor and perfunctory investigation, in the cases transferred to Crime Branch Unit V, Telgi was granted bail in several cases that the appellant as a member of the Special Task Force formed by the Government had directed Police Inspector Bhat of MCOC Cell to scrutinize the case papers of Telgi and submit a report, but showed undue haste in transferring the cases to Crime Branch Unit V, without waiting for the reports which were submitted by Inspector Bhat on 28.11.2002 and 6.12.2002 that when Police Inspector Zahid of Cyber Cell, Mumbai Crime Branch had submitted a good and sound report, instead of companyrelating the report with other cases and motivating the officers, the appellant expressed his displeasure with the inquiry by Zahid and suppressed the findings evidence that the appellant with a view to help Telgi, gave approval to fabricate the panchnama dated 12.1.2003 relating to the recovery of huge quantity of companynterfeit stamps stamp papers at Bhiwandi at the instance of accused Shabir Ahmed Shaikh, by describing him as an associate of Ram Ratan Soni though he was a member of Telgis crime syndicate and that the Appellant received a huge sum Rs.15 lakhs from Telgi for various favours shown.
The Special Judge, Pune, rejected Appellants bail application by order dated 22.2.2005.
