Delhi Police files charge sheet against Gangster Deepak Boxer in MCOCA

This charge sheet has been filed by the special cell of Delhi Police under sections of MCOCA on July 13.

New Delhi: Delhi Police filed a charge sheet in Patiala House Court against gangster Deepak Boxer in a case registered under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA).

This charge sheet has been filed by the special cell of Delhi Police under sections of MCOCA on July 13.

---

It is alleged that Deepak Boxer is a member of a crime syndicate of the Jitender alias Gogi gang.

In this case, 15 other accused are in custody and a charge sheet has already been filed.

The court has recently refused to extend the period of investigation related to Deepak Boxer. Thereafter the police filed the charge sheet against Deepak Boxer. This is a supplementary charge sheet in this case.

He was absconded in this case and arrested on April 15, 2023, after deportation from Mexico in April of this year.

Special judge Shailender Malik put up the charge sheet against Deepak Pahal alias Boxer for consideration on July 28, 2023.

The Court had refused to extend the period of investigation beyond 90 days in a case against Deepak Boxer.

The court had said that it is expected in the law that investigating agency would carry out the investigation earnestly without unnecessary delay. Such exercise cannot be taken as a mere formality as it involves the valuable right of liberty of the accused involved.

Special judge Shailender Malik on July 11 refused to extend the period of investigation.

He referred to the related provisions of MCOCA and said “Provision has been made to meet those situations where despite making sincere efforts, the nature of the case, facts and evidence is such that investigation is not possible to complete in 90 days.” “In the present case however first of all report of Public Prosecutor is completely silent about the specific reasons for which judicial detention of the accused is sought to be extended,” Special Judge Malik pointed out.

The special judge had merely mentioned that certain steps taken in the investigation have been left to be incomplete like a certified copy of criminal cases in which the accused Deepak Boxer is involved, could not be collected, details of Income Tax, his properties etc. could not be collected, cannot be a legal reason for the extension of judicial detention of accused.

“Court of law would not act merely on the dictation of investigating agency,” the judge said in the order passed on July 11.
The court also directed to send the Copy of the order to Pramod Kumar Kushwaha, Addl. C.P, as well as to H.G.S. Dhaliwal, Special C.P. (Special Cell).

The extension of the investigation period was sought on the ground that a Certified copy of several cases registered against the accused is being collected. Application for obtaining certificate copies has already been applied in different courts.

Details from the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, regarding the PAN card, and ITRs of the last 10 years of accused Deepak Pahal are still awaited.

Addl. PP filed a report in terms of section 21(2)(b) of the MCOC Act seeking for further extension of judicial detention of the accused from 90 days to 150 days. Deepak Pahal alias Boxer was earlier declared proclaimed offender on December 9, 2020, in this case, said the report.
Subsequently, he was arrested in another FIR of PS Special Cell. Since said accused Deepak Pahal was also wanted in the present case, he was formally arrested in this case on April 15, 2023, it added.

It was further stated that since 90 days period of judicial detention of the said accused is coming to an end on or before July 14, 2023.

ACP Lalit Mohan Negi appeared through Video Conferencing as well as Addl. PP for the State had submitted that although the investigation is almost complete, however certain aspects of the investigation are incomplete, therefore present application has been moved.

On the other hand, Advocate Virender Mual, Counsel for the accused, vehemently opposed the application. He submitted that the grounds taken in the application are very vague and not sustainable in law.

He also submitted that no Plausible reasons were given in the application. He argued that the valuable right of the accused getting bail would be frustrated.