Professional Documents
Culture Documents
signed by
SHAGUFTA Q
SHAGUFTA PATHAN
Q PATHAN Date:
2023.01.23 APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
15:59:00
+0530
SQ Pathan 1/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
rejecting his application for bail and as such seeks his enlargement
under Sections 120B, 201, 302, 364 and 403 of the Indian Penal
Code (`IPC'), Section 25 of the Arms Act and Sections 16, 18 and
SQ Pathan 2/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
Relevant Facts :
as under :
Police Station found 20 gelatin sticks and a note in the said car,
vide C.R. No. 35/2021 under Sections 286, 465, 473, 506(2) and
Intelligence Unit, Crime Branch, Mumbai (`the CIU') and the case
SQ Pathan 3/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
of the said case was assigned to Sachin Waze (A-1), the then API,
found, had a fake number plate and that the actual number of the
vehicle, a separate C.R. i.e. C.R. No. 47/2021 was registered with
transferred to CIU, Crime Branch, Mumbai and the said C.R. was
SQ Pathan 4/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
and 03.03.2021.
meet one police officer named Tawde, after which he did not
No. 16/2021.
SQ Pathan 5/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
before the ATS, Thane Unit, alleged foul play and expressed her
SQ Pathan 6/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
India, the NIA took over the investigation of the aforesaid cases
and directed the NIA to suo-motu register a case and take up the
SQ Pathan 7/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
Gor, (3) Vinayak Shinde, (4) Riyazuddin Kazi, (5) Sunil Mane, (6)
are informed that the NIA has also filed an application under
SQ Pathan 8/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
3.13 The sections alleged in the table qua the appellant are
in Para 18.12. The sections with which the appellant has been
charged are Sections 120B, 201, 302, 364 and 403 of the IPC;
SQ Pathan 9/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
under the Arms Act or under the Explosive Substances Act. The
and the sanction is only against Sachin Waze under the said Acts,
SQ Pathan 10/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
filed by the NIA, the appellant is not concerned with the Scorpio
vehicle laden with gelatin sticks and that the appellant’s role
SQ Pathan 11/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
of the circumstance.
SQ Pathan 12/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
facing prosecution not only under the provisions of the IPC but
record clearly show that the appellant had conspired with Sachin
taken on record.
Reasons :
SQ Pathan 13/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
24/25.02.2021.
vehicle, considering that the charge against Sachin Waze is, that
SQ Pathan 14/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
submission came, for the first time, during the course of the
Waze had conspired with. Atleast, prima facie, we do not find any
Scorpio vehicle. If this was the NIA’s case, why then had they
perplexing.
feeble attempt to show from the CDRs that the appellant was at
SQ Pathan 15/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
22:56 hrs., in the area, where Mansukh Hiren had parked his
Scorpio car.
Vikhroli and park the same on the service road near the flyover at
Scorpio Car; that the Ola dropped Mansukh Hiren near G.P.O. at
around 20:10 hrs.; that after taking the car keys, Sachin Waze left
SQ Pathan 16/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
KW-1 and Sachin Waze reached the spot, where the Scorpio was
parked and Sachin Waze directed KW-1 to open the car and
change the number plate of the said Scorpio vehicle and to take it
hrs. and from there, left towards Crawford Market and reached
there at 20:45 hrs. The appellant’s CDR relied upon shows that
20:25 till 20:36 hrs. It is the appellant’s case that he had gone to
SQ Pathan 17/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
prima facie, except for the said CDRs, which were pointed out
for the first time during arguments, prosecution has not been able
His statement also does not reveal that they (Sachin Waze and the
the Vikhroli area from 21.10 hrs. till 23.45 hrs., where, the
show that any calls were exchanged between Sachin Waze and
SQ Pathan 18/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
appellant was present at the spot near the car, when Sachin Waze
and KW-1 reached the spot, where the Scorpio was parked i.e.
the Scorpio vehicle, which was laden with gelatin sticks. Prima
facie, we feel that this feeble attempt was made to connect the
case, that Sachin Waze had done a lot of planning in this regard,
Hotel Oberoi for 100 days; had paid in cash for booking of the
SQ Pathan 19/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
room in Hotel Oberoi; had given a fake Aadhar Card, etc. We,
prima facie, find that the NIA has not done investigation with
that again, it was Sachin Waze, who was the author of the same.
SQ Pathan 20/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
They submitted that for the reasons best known, the higher-ups
recorded by the NIA. The said witness in his statement has stated
stated that the NIA showed him one email dated 09.03.2021,
SQ Pathan 21/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
responsibility for the Antilia terror scare, has been resolved by the
Special Cell, Delhi Police, and that, the mobile phone number
linked with the said Telegram Channel was found to be used from
similar name, since the time a blast had occurred outside the
such a report in writing; that since the work was confidential and
was being done by the Special Cell, Delhi Police, he stated that it
this regard. He has stated that the CP told him that it was a very
important matter and that he should be giving the said report and
that the CP told him that he would talk to the IG, NIA, in this
SQ Pathan 22/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
The said report was in one paragraph and was shown to the CP.
After going through the report, the CP asked him to insert the
also told by the CP that the IG, NIA, was expected shortly and
and mailed the said report to the official email of the said CP.
Thereafter, the CP asked him how much was to be paid for the
stated that when the PA left the chamber, the CP called the PA
SQ Pathan 23/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
stated that he had told the CP that the amount was too much,
concerned, the said witness has further stated that he had fetched
resolved by him was different from the one on which the Post had
appeared. He has further stated that the one resolved by him had
SQ Pathan 24/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
was infact resolved by the Special Cell, Delhi Police and not by
him, however, when he shared his input with the Special Cell,
original report prepared by him was very short and did not
and the report now shown to him was modified by him as per the
directions of the CP. He has further stated that he does not know
SQ Pathan 25/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
how the said report got leaked to the media, as, when he handed
Special Cell, Delhi Police was still working on the input and that
work of the CP. He has stated that CP called him and initially
asked him to give Rs. 3,00,000/- and thereafter, the CP asked him
He has stated that the said amount was withdrawn from the SS
Fund. Why such a huge payment was made to the said witness i.e.
Cyber Expert, what was the interest of the CP, is a grey area, for
SQ Pathan 26/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
appellant with the Scorpio vehicle (laden with gelatin sticks), that
too, during the course of the submissions, when the NIA was
questioned. We are afraid that the NIA has not done indepth
Waze had conspired with, for parking the Scorpio vehicle laden
Scorpio vehicle laden with gelatin sticks. We hope and trust, that
SQ Pathan 27/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
Malabar Hill Police Station, though there was no reason for him
that the appellant and Sachin Waze met on 28.02.2021 for about
the appellant and Sachin Waze travelled in one car, towards Worli
SQ Pathan 28/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
Sea-face, where again they got down and started talking for about
that the appellant met Sachin Waze for a reason; (i) that the Ex-
restaurants and pubs, across Mumbai and had allegedly asked him
to hand over the extorted money within one week, which period
case and remove him from service; (iii) as Sachin Waze was afraid,
he met the appellant for the same. In this regard i.e with respect
SQ Pathan 29/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
the Ex-Home Minister. Prima facie, the meeting with the Ex-
senior counsel show that Sachin Waze had visited the Home
about the conversation that took place between Sachin Waze and
the stage of bail. Thus, the defence of the appellant that he was
SQ Pathan 30/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
Sachin Waze and the appellant met. The fact remains that the
not concerned with any of the cases i.e. either pertaining to the
together in one car from Malabar Hill Police Station to Worli Sea-
face, where again they get down and were talking for about
SQ Pathan 31/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
02.03.2021, where the appellant and Sachin Waze met the CP,
same day, Mansukh Hiren was also present in the CP Office, and
that the appellant went to meet the CP; that after 15-20 minutes,
the appellant came down and went to CIU to meet Sachin Waze;
SQ Pathan 32/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
however, the appellant asked him to wait down; that after 10-15
he had seen the appellant coming out of the CP’s chamber. The
facie, the fact remains that the appellant was present in the CP
counsel for the appellant for the presence of the appellant in the
CP Office.
SQ Pathan 33/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
that Mansukh Hiren had met him on 02.03.2021 and that he was
him from media and police with respect to his stolen car, and
SQ Pathan 34/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
was being harassed by the police and the media because the said
and Thane. Advocate Giri has stated that Mansukh Hiren visited
his office at 3:00 p.m. and left his office at 5:00 p.m. and that
kind on his face. He has stated that whilst giving the instructions,
SQ Pathan 35/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
be, because Mansukh Hiren felt that Sachin Waze was trying to
during search of Sachin Waze’s Office, seized one letter i.e. the
the said seized letter, has in his statement stated that the contents
Waze and as such, were not in the original draft. It appears that 7
Sachin Waze. Advocate Giri has further stated that the said edited
SQ Pathan 36/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
run by the appellant. It is the prosecution case that the said bag
Sachin Waze from his car to the appellant’s car. According to the
both under Sections 161 and 164, has stated that on 03.03.2021,
around 20:00 hrs. to 21:30 hrs., Sachin Waze had come to the
the side; that Sachin Waze handed over one bag from the boot of
his SUV car to KW-13 to keep in appellant’s car, saying that the
the zip of the bag being partially open, he saw bundles of Rs.
500/- notes in the said bag and found it heavier than a bag
Waze noticed that he had seen the bag and hence, had threatened
SQ Pathan 37/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
Sachin Waze) to the appellant, the appellant told him not to take
Sachin Waze arrived there and met the appellant; that after
speaking with the appellant for about 5-10 minutes, Sachin Waze
opened the boot of his Prado vehicle and the appellant told KW-
counsel for the appellant, that the said witness had not disclosed
SQ Pathan 38/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
how far this witness was from KW-13. Suffice to state, that this
bag was transferred from Sachin Waze’s car to the appellant’s car.
Bhosle have stated that Sachin Waze was present in the CIU
SQ Pathan 39/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
the contrary, show that Sachin Waze was at the CIU office,
hrs., and at 21:55 hrs. at Bandra Worli Sea Link, and near
mobile, and hence there are no CDRs after that. No doubt, there
Sachin Waze transferring one bag into the appellant’s car and
that, one of the witness i.e. KW-13 has stated that the said bag
contained cash. What also cannot be lost sight of is, that the
here and there, prima facie, would not oust the prosecution case.
SQ Pathan 40/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
Mr. Ponda also submitted that even if it is assumed for the sake of
Hundred Crores was not collected and that the said amount was
given for getting him released on bail. This is the defence of the
Manish Soni’s (A-9) tickets were not booked by the appellant but
SQ Pathan 41/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
said act. He submitted that even as far as the allegation that the
she had booked the tickets for Manish Soni (A-9) from Mumbai
SQ Pathan 42/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
Shelar’s daughter, however, what cannot be lost sight of, is, that
Santosh Shelar (A-6) was closely associated with the appellant and
he was his informer and as such, the said circumstance i.e. being
SQ Pathan 43/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
belonged to the appellant’s wife and that she had leased out the
and Prakash Vithhal Poojari, who were running the said hotel,
under the name and style of Hotel Sai Leela Grand. Mr. Ponda,
that the said hotel was leased out in 2018 and that merely
that admittedly, the said hotel was not run by the appellant nor
his wife. He submitted that the said hotel is registered with the
the said hotel. We may note, that during this period, whenever
SQ Pathan 44/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
if Manish Soni (A-9) was sent there by the Authorities. It was the
who in turn, had given him the details of the hotel for quarantine,
Shelar (A-6) came to meet Manish Soni (A-9) in the said hotel.
He has stated that Manish Soni (A-9) stayed in his hotel for about
7 days and that during the said stay, Santosh Shelar (A-6) had
come to the hotel to meet Manish Soni (A-9), two to three times.
Manish Soni was permitted to leave only after his Covid RTPCR
SQ Pathan 45/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
test and end of his quarantine period. He has further stated that
when Manish Soni checked out of the hotel, he did not pay the
charges and when asked about it, he said that Santosh Shelar
he knows the appellant for about 15 years and Santosh Shelar for
about two years. He has stated that when he and his business
suggested to them the said place i.e. the first and second floor in
rent the first and second floors of the Raylon Arcade Building
standing in the name of the appellant’s wife for Rs. 1,13,000/- for
running a hotel. He has stated that their Hotel Sai Leela Grand
SQ Pathan 46/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
has further stated that Santosh Shelar had come to meet Manish
stayed in their hotel for about 7 days and that during those seven
days, Santosh Shelar had come to the hotel to meet Manish Soni,
only after doing RTPCR test and end of his quarantine period.
hotel, he did not pay the hotel rent. He has stated that when the
hotel manager asked him about the hotel rent, he said that
SQ Pathan 47/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
Santosh Shelar will pay the hotel rent. He further stated that
when Santosh Shelar met him, he told him that he would pay
16.05.2021, Manish Soni left, without paying the hotel bill and
after that, neither Santosh Shelar nor Manish Soni paid the hotel
bill.
purchase one simple mobile phone and two activated new sim
Mansukh Hiren took place; the role of Sanotsh Shelar and others
SQ Pathan 48/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
gave him the details of the hotel for quarantine for filling up the
BMC form. He has stated that Santosh Shelar bore the expenses
in the Hotel Sai Leela Grand, Santosh Shelar came to meet him
13.05.2021, when he was taking tea, the appellant came in his car
SQ Pathan 49/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
Sh.Singh who run Hotel Sai Leela Grand from the said
premises. The said hotel is being used as a quarantine
facility for air passengers arriving at Mumbai
international airport. One person named Manish Soni
had stayed in the said hotel in the second week of May
2021 and __________ acquainted with Manish Soni
during the said period.”
KW-13 has further stated that Santosh Shelar has been a regular
SQ Pathan 50/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
appellant to his office many times and that many times Santosh
the murder of Mansukh Hiren. KW-13 has further stated that the
has given the details as to on which phones and how calls have
one simple mobile phone and two activated new sim cards on
Shelar. One of the sim card was handed over by Santosh Shelar
SQ Pathan 51/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
prima facie his defences and will have to be tested during his trial.
appeal against acquittal of the said appellant has been filed by the
dismissed.
SQ Pathan 52/53
APEAL-258-2022-J.doc
prima facie, only for the purpose of deciding the appellant’s prayer for
bail and as such, the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits,
judgment.
SQ Pathan 53/53