High Court

Legal Reasoning

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADCRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3470 OF 2023Gurdeepsingh Kuldeepsingh Sandhu,Age 32 yrs., Occ. Business,R/o Old Kautha, Nanded,Tq. & Dist. Nanded. … Applicant… Versus …1The State of MaharashtraThrough Police Station, Sonkhed,Tq. Loha, Dist. Nanded. 2Tejas Harikishan Lohiya,Age 40 yrs., Occ. Business,R/o Behind Dr. Bajaj Hospital,Mutha Compound, Vajirabad,Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded. … Respondents...Mr. M.K. Bhosale, Advocate for applicantMr. S.A. Gaikwad, APP for respondent No.1Respondent No.2 - served...CORAM :SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI &ROHIT W. JOSHI, JJ.RESERVED ON :15rd JANUARY, 2025PRONOUNCED ON :10th FEBRUARY, 2025 2Cri.Appln_3470_2023ORDER :( PER : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. )1Present application has been filed initially for quashing andsetting aside First Information Report vide Crime No.81/2023 dated30.06.2023 registered with Sonkhed Police Station, Dist. Nanded and later onby way of amendment for quashing proceedings in Sessions Case No.80/2023pending before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kandhar, Tq. Kandhar,Dist. Nanded, for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 384, 385, 386,387, 507 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and underSections 25, 27(2)(3) of the Arms Act. 2Heard learned Advocate Mr. M.K. Bhosale for applicant andlearned APP Mr. S.A. Gaikwad for respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 thoughserved failed to appear. 3Learned Advocate appearing for applicant has taken us throughFirst Information Report as well as charge sheet and submits that as perprosecution story, applicant used to give tip to accused No.1 and thenaccused No.1 and other accused used to give voice calls on WhatsApp forextorting money, however, name of present applicant is not reflected in FirstInformation Report and nothing has been recovered from him. The only 3Cri.Appln_3470_2023evidence against applicant is the statement of son of co-accused VazirsinghGurubachansingh Fauji and even the alleged statement of co-accusedVazirsingh is inadmissible in nature. It would then be unjust to ask theapplicant to face the trial. 4Learned APP strongly opposed the application and submits thatin First Information Report as well as in statements of witnesses it has comethat accused No.1 Navdipsingh Lakhvindarsingh Nagra, who is presentlyabsconding, used to give phone call from Pakistan and used to ask his friendsand co-accused Vazirsingh to get amount of extortion. In fact, with the helpof co-accused Ankita Kamble this extortion racket was going on and with theWhatsApp calls threats used to be given to eliminate the person, in case offailure on his part to give the money. Informant had received around 26WhatsApp voice calls from the said phone number from Pakistan and amountthat was demanded from him was Rs.1 Crore. He had agreed to give amountof Rs.2,00,000/- by the time he had contacted police, but then along withpolice the trap was laid. He prepared the bag containing amount ofRs.2,00,000/- and went to his place of business i.e. stone crusher. In front ofthe police officer he had received the phone call from Pakistan. At that time,he was then called on the road in front of stone crusher. Accordingly, hewent there. A Tata Harrier of black colour bearing registration No.MH 26- 4Cri.Appln_3470_2023CE/8710 came in front of him, in which accused Vazirsingh was sitting andone motorcycle came, on which there was a Sardar sitting along with a lady.Accused Vazirsingh told informant that amount could be given to saidSardarji. Accordingly, informant gave the said amount and police had triedto catch him, but accused Vazirsingh fired from his pistol towards one policeperson. Police also in answer opened fire and overpowered Vazirsingh, saidSardarji and the lady. Said Sardarji was by name Jaideo Gurupratap Ragiand the lady was Ankita Nanasaheb Kamble. Thus, those three persons wereapprehended from the spot. Name of present applicant came in picture laterand it is from the information that has been given by one Mohit Singh, who isthe son of accused Vazirsingh. The cell phone of applicant has been seizedand has been sent for analysis to Forensic Science Laboratory. The report isstill awaited. Taking into consideration the seriousness of the offence, thiscannot be the fit case where powers under Section 482 of the Code ofCriminal Procedure should be exercised. 5Contents of First Information Report are already narrated above.Informant – respondent No.2 has stated about the phone calls those werereceived between 22.06.2023 to 28.06.2023 from Pakistan to his mobilenumber, which were about 26 WhatsApp voice calls. Amount of Rs.1 Crorewas demanded. It was told to him that the person who was calling on 5Cri.Appln_3470_2023WhatsApp call was one person by name Rindha. He was threatened that ifamount is not given, then he would be killed in the same manner as onebusinessman Sanjay Biyani was killed. Therefore, there was terror amongstthe businessmen in Nanded. Three persons viz. Vazirsingh, Jaideo and Ankitahave been arrested on the spot, though accused Vazirsingh had opened firefrom his pistol. Certainly, when phone calls were received from Pakistan,there was supposed to be the investigation, but it appears that as those threepersons were arrested and they should not get default bail, the charge sheetappears to have been filed on 29.09.2023, when their date of arrest is on30.06.2023 in respect of Ankita and Jaideo, whereas 04.07.2023 forVazirsingh, as it appears that he was required to be hospitalized immediatelyafter he was taken in custody on 30.06.2023 and after he was declaredmedically fit he has been arrested. Possibility of further investigation underSection 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be ruled out in thismatter, as two accused viz. Navdipsingh Nagra and Ranjit Gill are yet to bearrested. 6As regards the evidence against the applicant is concerned, it isstated that he used to be with Ranjitsingh and Navdipsingh. Presentapplicant had met Ranjitsingh. This fact was disclosed by Mohit Singh, whois son of Vazirsingh. Of course, when Vazirsingh himself is accused, his 6Cri.Appln_3470_2023statement cannot be taken into consideration unless it is in the form of aconfession recorded by legal procedure. But, still the statement of MohitSingh can be made use of for further investigation. The cell phone of presentapplicant has been seized. Under such circumstance, taking intoconsideration the seriousness of offence, the involvement of some numbersfrom Pakistan and the evidence yet to be collected, we do not find this to bea fit case where First Information Report and charge sheet i.e. proceedings inSessions Case needs to be quashed and set aside against applicant.Application stands rejected. ( ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. )( SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. )agd