Court directs reconsideration under Section 112 for petty organized crime due to insufficient evidence for organized crime syndicate involvement.
In a significant ruling, the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench, presided over by Justice Gajendra Singh, has partially allowed a criminal revision petition filed by Hiralal, challenging the framing of charges under Section 111(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The charges, which pertained to organized crime, were set aside due to the prosecution's failure to meet the statutory preconditions necessary for invoking the said provision.
The case originated from Crime No. 113/2024, registered on the complaint of Amit Upadhayay, alleging fraudulent stock market investments facilitated by unknown persons, leading to a loss of Rs. 26,55,000. Despite the serious nature of the allegations, the High Court found that the prosecution did not provide concrete evidence of Hiralal's involvement in an organized crime syndicate, a prerequisite under Section 111(4) of the BNSS, 2023.
Justice Singh emphasized that the framing of charges under organized crime provisions requires evidence of continuing unlawful activity and multiple charge sheets within the preceding ten years. The court pointed out that mere allegations or ongoing investigations are insufficient to invoke Section 111, highlighting the necessity for concrete proof of involvement in organized crime syndicates.
The judgment referenced several precedents, including the decisions in Sajjan Kumar v. CBI and State of Maharashtra v. Shiva alias Shivaji Ramaji Sonawane, which elucidate the scope of judicial scrutiny during the framing of charges. The court reiterated that judicial minds must apply stringent scrutiny to ascertain a prima facie case based on evidence, without engaging in trial-like inquiry at the charge-framing stage.
While the charges under Section 111(4) were dismissed, the court granted liberty to the prosecution to pursue charges under Section 112 of the BNSS, 2023, which deals with petty organized crime, should further evidence warrant such action. The trial court was directed to reassess the applicability of Section 112, ensuring an opportunity for both parties to be heard.
The judgment reflects the court's commitment to uphold the integrity of legal processes, ensuring that the serious implications of organized crime charges are substantiated by robust evidence. The decision underscores the importance of adhering to statutory requirements in criminal proceedings, protecting individuals from unjust prosecution under severe legal provisions.
Bottom line:-
Framing of charges under Section 111(4) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 requires strict adherence to the parameters laid down under the provision, including evidence of continuing unlawful activity and membership in an organized crime syndicate.
Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Sections 111(4), 112, 250, 193
Hiralal v. State of M.P, (Madhya Pradesh)(Indore) : Law Finder Doc id # 2891543
