C. Praveen Kumar, J.

1. The short question that falls for consideration in the present appeal filed under Section 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (for short “the Act”), is “whether the appellant herein is entitled for police custody of two respondents/accused in Rc.No.1/2018/NIA/Hyderabad (Seizure of FICN in Visakhapatnam), after the expiry of first 15 days of remand on the ground that there was a change in the investigating agency”.

2. The brief facts which lead to filing of the present appeal are as under:

Fake Indian currency notes of Rs.2,000/- denomination having face value of Rs.10,20,000/- were seized from the possession of the two respondents/accused while they were traveling in Train No.18645, Howrah-Hyderabad East Coast Express at Visakhapatnam railway station. The incident is said to have occurred on 31.03.2018 at 5.55 a.m., wherein the Regional Unit of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Visakhapatnam, conducted raid, seized the notes and arrested the accused. The accused in their statement disclosed that the fake Indian currency notes were smuggled from Bangladesh and they were handed over to them at a place near Farakka, Malda District, West Bengal, by a courier sent by one Tajamul. It is said that initially a case was registered by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence under Section 135 (1) (i) (C) of the Customs Act, 1962 and then they were arrested and remanded to judicial custody till 13.04.2018. Later, their remand was extended in connection with the said crime. Thereafter, the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, issued a letter dated 13.04.2018 opining that the scheduled offence under the Act has been committed and having regard to the gravity of the offence and its interstate as well as cross border linkages, directed the National Investigation Agency to investigate the case in accordance with the Act. In exercise of powers conferred under sub-section 4 of Section 6 read with Section 8 of the Act, the Central Government directed the National Investigation Agency to take up the investigation of the case. Pursuant thereto, the case was transferred from the file of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence to the National Investigation Agency, whereon it came to be re-numbered as Rc.No.01/2018/NIA/HYD (FICN CASE) and accordingly the case was also transferred from the Court of Economic Offences at Visakhapatnam to the Court of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for trial of NIA Cases at Vijayawada. The accused were produced before the Court on 27.04.2018 on which date the investigating agency filed an application seeking police custody of the two accused for a period of 12 days, for the purpose of extensive investigation. It is to be noted here that the Agency re-registered the above crime for the offence punishable under Section 120-B and 489-B and 489-C of IPC, which are shown in the Schedule of the Act. The said application filed by the Agency for police custody of respondents herein was rejected on 04.05.2018. Challenging the same the present appeal came to be filed under Section 21 of the Act.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the finding of the trial Court in holding that the police custody can be granted only in the first 15 days of remand, would not apply to the case on hand. According to him the agency to which the case has been entrusted is empowered to conduct investigation in serious cases where the sovereignty, integrity and economic stability of the Country is involved and as such they are entitled for police custody within the first 15 days of remand, after the case was transferred to them. He further pleads that since the case is renumbered and the nature of offence committed are one under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, the agency is entitled to have police custody of the accused, to know the truth. He took us through Sections 5, 6 and 8 of the Act and also the judgments of the Apex Court in Central Bureau of Inve