Special statute bail requires twin conditions and a probability-based assessment, not a full trial-like evaluation of evidence.

Bail under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act remained subject to the twin conditions in Section 21(4): the court had to find reasonable grounds for believing that the accused was not guilty and was not likely to commit an offence while on bail. "Reasonable grounds" required more than a prima facie view, but the assessment at the bail stage could remain tentative and need not become a full trial-like examination of evidence. On the material considered, the alleged conversation and surrounding circumstances were insufficient at that stage to conclusively establish abetment of organised crime or conduct attracting Section 24. Bail was therefore held grantable and the refusal of bail was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether bail could be granted in a prosecution under the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crimes Act, 1999 despite the restrictions in Section 21(4), and whether the material on record disclosed reasonable grounds for believing that the accused was not guilty of the alleged offences.

Analysis: The statutory power to grant bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 remained subject to Section 21(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crimes Act, 1999. The provision required satisfaction of two cumulative conditions: that there were reasonable grounds for believing that the accused was not guilty of the offence and that he was not likely to commit any offence while on bail. The expression "reasonable grounds" was treated as something more than prima facie grounds and required substantial probable cause. The assessment at the bail stage was not to amount to a meticulous evaluation of evidence, but it could extend beyond a superficial review where a special statute was involved. On the material placed, the alleged conversation and surrounding circumstances were found insufficient, at that stage, to conclusively show abetment of organized crime under Section 3(2) or conduct attracting Section 24. The Court also noted that the length of incarceration and the stage of the trial were relevant factors in the overall balancing exercise.

Conclusion: Bail was held to be grantable, and the appeal was decided in favour of the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The restrictions under the special statute did not bar release on bail on the facts of the case, and the impugned refusal of bail was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: Under Section 21(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crimes Act, 1999, bail may be granted only when the court finds reasonable grounds to believe that the accused is not guilty and will not commit an offence while on bail, and those findings may be reached on a tentative, probability-based assessment without undertaking a final trial-like evaluation of the evidence.

---