A division bench of Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Aniruddha Bose ruled that threat of violence or even intimidation or even coercion would fall within the ambit of ‘organised crime’ under MCOCA.
“Actual use of violence is not always a sine qua non for an activity falling within the mischief of organised crime, when undertaken by an individual singly or jointly as part of organised crime syndicate or on behalf of such syndicate. Threat of violence or even intimidation or even coercion would fall within the mischief,” the judgment held.
This apart, use of other unlawful means would also fall within the same mischief, the Court added.
The Court was hearing a criminal appeal challenging a decision of the Bombay High Court’s Nagpur bench, dismissing the appellant Abhishek’s plea challenging invocation of MCOCA against him.
Abhishek along with others, were booked in a criminal case lodged on May 8, 2020 under charges of kidnapping a restaurant owner in Nagpur for ransom of ₹20 lakh.
The police authorities subsequently granted sanction to prosecute the accused under the MCOCA, considering the fact that they have indulged in “continuous criminal activities” since Abhishek has been named in multiple such cases of violence.
In his defense, Abhishek argued that the authorities wrongly invoked MCOCA against him and erred in interpreting the provisions of the special enactment.
The Court said that strict adherence to provisions of the MCOCA by the authorities cannot be stretched beyond common sense and practical requirements.
“Strict adherence by the authorities concerned to the requirements of MCOCA also cannot be stretched beyond common sense and practical requirements in terms of the letter and spirit of the statute,” the bench said.
To apply MCOCA in a case, the authorities must consider whether the basic and threshold requirements, as per Section 2(1) (d), (e) and (f) are fulfilled.
“It is not in doubt that the provisions of MCOCA need to be strictly construed and for their application, an unlawful activity has to fall within the periphery of organised crime….So far as the applicability of the rule of strict construction qua MCOCA is concerned, it being a special penal statute, this much is clear that no one is to be made subject to this law by implication or by presumption; and all doubts concerning its application would, ordinarily, be resolved in favour of the accused,” the bench noted.
However, the rule of strict construction cannot be applied in an impracticable manner so as to render the statute itself nugatory, the Court underlined.
“In other words, the rule of strict construction of a penal statute or a special penal statute is not intended to put all the provisions in such a tight iron cast that they become practically unworkable, and thereby, the entire purpose of the law is defeated,” the judges added.
Source: Barandbench
