Lalit @ Laddu S/O Rambhau Yadav v. State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps New Kamptee Nagpur

3BA 576.2020.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO. 576 OF 2020 Lalit @ Laddu s/o Rambhau Yadav, Nagpur Vs.

State of Maharashtra _______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court'

s orders of directions Court'

s or Judge'

s orders.

and Registrar'

s Orders.

Shri Nitesh Samundre, Advocate for the applicant. Shri I.J. Damle, A.P.P. for the respondent/State. CORAM : PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J.

DATED : DECEMBER 02, 2020.

Heard.

2.

The applicant is said to be arrested on 18/10/2018 in connection with Crime No. 308/2018 dated 19/10/2018 registered at Police Station Kamptee, District Nagpur (Rural) for the offence punishable under Sections 397, 392, 341, 506 and 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, Section 4/5 of the Arms Act, 1959, and Sections 3(1)(ii) and 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 ("the said Act" for short).

3.

I have perused the application, reply affidavit and the chargesheet, with the assistance of learned counsel appearing for both the parties.

4.

The applicant is said to be the gang leader of an organised crime syndicate. It is the case of the prosecution

3BA 576.2020.odt that the present applicant, along with the other co-accused, assaulted the informant Sonu Bhimte on Pawangaon Road and robbed his two mobile phones and cash of Rs.4,000/- (rupees four thousand) by giving threats of life on the point of knife.

5.

During investigation, it was transpired that the present applicant, along with the other co-accused, has committed similar type of offences in the past also. 6.

It was also transpired during investigation that the prosecution could trace out the witness to whom the robbed mobile phone was sold by the present applicant. The Police also recorded confessional statements of the accused persons under Section 18 of the said Act.

7.

Considering the nature of offence and the role attributed to the present applicant so also considering his complicity in other crimes of similar nature coupled with the fact that he being the gang leader of organised crime syndicate, there is no guarantee that he will not continue his criminal activities in future, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, the application is rejected. JUDGE Sumit