MP High Court: Multiple FIRs Alone Don't Invoking Organised Crime Charge Under BNS
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that multiple cases against a person are not enough to invoke the charge of organised crime under Section 111(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. Justice Gajendra Singh emphasized that certain basic parameters must be met before this charge can be applied. The court was reviewing a case where the State had justified invoking Section 111 based on various cases registered against the petitioner in different states, including Thane, Cyberabad, and Jalandhar.
The court found that the prosecution's reasons only showed that complaints were under investigation but did not meet the required standards. It stated that the trial court committed an error in framing charges under Section 111(4) of BNS, 2023. The court allowed the prosecution to submit additional material through further investigation if they wished to pursue the charge later. At present, the charge under Section 111(4) was deemed unsustainable.
The court outlined the necessary conditions for invoking Section 111: the offences must have been committed; the accused must be a member of an organised crime syndicate; the crime must be committed as a member or on behalf of the syndicate; the accused must have been chargesheeted more than once in the past ten years for a cognizable offence punishable with imprisonment of three years or more; and the crime must involve violence, intimidation, threat, coercion, or other unlawful means.
The case originated from a complaint by Amit, who alleged that the petitioner was part of a WhatsApp group "USB Securities" that induced him to invest in the stock market with promises of profits. Amit transferred ₹26.55 Lakhs to various accounts. An FIR was registered against unknown persons, including Vinay Yadav, Rahul Yadav, and Herrlal. The petitioner challenged the framing of charges, arguing it was based on conjectures and that no incriminating material was seized.
The court noted that the petitioner came into contact with Rahul and Vinay in 2023 and was asked to procure bank accounts for ₹1 lakh. He paid ₹5,000 per account and provided four accounts to Vijay Mewada. All parties communicated via social media and deleted chat history. The court found prima facie evidence for charges under Sections 318(4) and 316(5) read with Section 3(5) of BNS, 2023. However, referencing Aamir Bashir Magray v. State, the court reiterated that liability under Section 111 requires continuous unlawful activity and multiple chargesheeting in the past ten years.