- (1.) HEARD Shri. Tiwari, learned advocate for the applicants and Shri. Sathianathan, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
(2.) THIS is an application for grant of bail, pending the hearing and final disposal of the appeal. The application has already been withdrawn insofar as applicant No. 2 - Mahesh is concerned. Insofar applicant No. 3 - Ashok is concerned, an earlier bail application bearing Criminal Application No. 1912 of 2002 was filed in this Court on behalf of this accused. However, the said bail application came to be unconditionally withdrawn on25-9-2002. I am informed that this accused is a driver of one Santosh Ambekar, who is the main accused in this case and was caught during an attempt to commit dacoity. Since, the application on behalf of applicant No. 3 was withdrawn unconditionally, I am not inclined to entertain the present application on his behalf. As far as applicant No. 1 is concerned, she is a lady and the sister of the main accused Santosh Ambekar. She was also an applicant in Criminal Application No. 1912 of 2002. Her application for bail was rejected by this Court vide an order dated-3-10-2002. A perusal of the said order indicates that her bail was rejected on the ground that she was not on bail during the trial and that she had been under custody since her arrest from 4-8-2000. The order passsed by this Court did not take into account the merits of the case, to which I will presently advert to.
(3.) THE prosecution case was that on9-4-1999, one Anil Ninawe was murdered by a gang of the main accused Santosh Ambekar in respect of which Crime No. 116 of 1999 was registered at Lakadganj Police Station against the said accused Santosh Ambekar and six other members of his gang for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 147, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code. THE police found that several crimes had been registered against Santosh Ambekar and accused Nos. 2 to 7. THEse seven persons were prominently found having links with each other in commission of organised crime. In the circumstances, sanction was sought by the police machinery to register a crime against them under Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred as the M. C. O. C. Act ). THE said sanction was accorded against the seven persons by the Additional Commissioner of Police, Nagpur, vide his order dated-26-9-1999. It is not the prosecution case that the present applicant No. 1 Vandana was involved in any of the crimes or in any of the cases said to have been committed by Santosh Ambekar or his gang members. Vandana is the married sister of Santosh Ambekar. She had separated from her husband and was living in the same house with Santosh Ambekar. Santosh Ambekar was absconding and the police was in search of him. Since the search had proved to be futile, the Court had, on the request of the Investigating Officer, issued a proclamation in respect of Santosh Ambekar. The police had also kept a tab on the house of Santosh Ambekar where Vandana was residing and had tapped the telephone in the house, after following the due procedure of law. The material against the present applicant No. 1 - Vandana is that on28-6-2000, Vandana received a telephone telling her that he was going to contact his associates at Nagpur on telephone No. 772858 situated near Aychit Mandir and that he had proceeded from Mumbai to Nasik in connection with some work. Another telephone call is said to have been received by Vandana from Santosh Ambekar on23-7-2000 in which Santosh has said to have informed Vandana that Crime persons from Nagpur have come and he will be leaving for Delhi and to inform the sister at Delhi. It is alleged that thereafter Vandana rang up to her sister at Delhi on telephone No. 5571097 and informed the aforesaid to her sister and mother.;