JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Sujit Narayan Prasad and Subhash Chand, JJ.
Fuleshwar Gope – Petitioner
versus
Union of India and Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(Cr.) No.443 of 2022
Decided on 21.3.2023
(A) National Investigating Agency Act, 2008 – Section 6(5) – There is no lack of jurisdiction in NIA to carry on further investigation and submit a supplementary report. (Para 9)
(B) Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 – Sections 17, 18, 21 and 22C read with Section 45 and Rules 3 and 4 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) (Recommendation and Sanction of Prosecution) Rules, 2008 – Constitution of India – Article 226 – Membership of unlawful association and terrorist gang proscribed by State of Jharkhand – Petitioner criminally conspired to directly or indirectly raise or collect funds, either from legitimate or illegitimate sources – Sanctioning Authority is required to apply its mind on the basis of fact gathered in course of investigation by Investigating Agency – Time limit for making recommendation by authority provided under Rule 3 of Rules, 2008, has strictly been adhered to – While taking cognizance Special Judge has perused case diary as also statement of various prosecution witnesses apart from various documents and material exhibits – Cognizance has been taken by taking note of culpability which has been surfaced in course of investigation – Due application of mind has been applied after giving due consideration to culpability of petitioner and thereafter, Special Judge has come to prima-facie view of availability of material laid to take cognizance under Section 120B of I.P.C. read with Sections 17, 18, 21 and 22C of U.A.(P) Act, 1967 and under Section 17(i) & (ii) of C.L.A. Act, 1908 – Impugned order upheld. (Paras 10, 12, 15, 17 to 19)
Result: Writ Petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.—This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India inter-alia for the following reliefs:—
(I) For quashing the sanction vide letter no.06/Avi-01/21/2017-2637 order dated 12.05.2017 (Annexure-5) has been granted by the Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Prisons & Disaster Management, Ranchi to Central Government to accord to Sanction of NIA U/s 45(2) U.A(P) Act with respect of Bero P.S. Case No.67/2016.
(II) For quashing suo-moto letter No.F.No.11011/51/2017/ISIV 16.01.2018 (Annexure-7) issued by under Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Internal Security-I Division, New Delhi to N.I.A. to take over the investigation of Bero P.S. Case No.67/2016 dated 10.11.2016.
(III) For quashing the sanction letter no.11011/51/2017/NIA order dated 22.07.2020 (Annexure-11) issued by the under Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, CTCR Division, New Delhi granting sanction to prosecute the Petitioner as Accused No.17 in No.R.C.-02/2018/NIA/DLI.
(IV) For quashing the Cognizance order dated 25.07.2020 U/s 120B of the IPC r/w Section 17, 18, 21 & 22C of U.A(P) Act, 1967, U/s 17 (i) & (ii) of CLA Act 1908 (Annexure-13) and charge has been framed on 16.03.2021 (Annexure-14) offence U/s 120B of the IPC r/w Section 21 & 22C of U.A(P) Act, 1967, U/s 17 of CLA Act 1908 by the Learned Sri A.K. Mishra NO.1, AJC-XVI cum-Spl. Judge NIA, Ranchi to the petitioner in connection with R.C.-02/2018/NIA/DLI pending in the Court of Learned Sri M.K. Verma, Spl. Judge NIA, Ranchi.
2. The brief facts of the case as per the prosecution story is that the petitioner is a poor farmer and works as Munshi for a contractor on daily wage basis. He does not have any criminal antecedents.
The allegations against the petitioner are that he is an associate of P.L.F.I. acquainted with the facts that Dinesh Gope @ Kuldeep Yadav @ Banku (A-6/absconder) is a terrorist and Chief of P.L.F.I. and collects/raises levy through extortion. The petitioner has criminally conspired with the members of P.L.F.I., an unlawful association and terrorist gang proscribed by the State of Jharkhand, namely, Dinesh Gope (A/6), Sumant Kumar @ Pawan Kumar (A/7), Hira Devi @ Anita Devi (A/14).
On direction of Dinesh Gope @ Kuldeep Yadav @ Banku, the petitioner had formed a company namely, M/s Shiv Shakti Samridhi Infra Pvt. Ltd. (A/20) along with the partnership of Hira Devi @ Anita Devi (A/14).
The petitioner criminally conspired to directly or indirectly raise or collect funds, either from legitimate or illegitimate sources or persons knowing fully well that such funds are likely to be used by P.L.F.I., a terrorist gang, for their nefarious/terrorist activities. The petitioner, on the direction of Dinesh Gope collected the amount through extortion and channelized it into the bank account of M/s Shiv Shakti Samridhi Infra Pvt. Ltd.
The petitioner, on the direction of Dinesh Gope and with the association of Sumant Kumar and Hira Devi @ Anita Devi was deeply involved in the larger conspiracy and in the commission of the instant crime and was channelizing the extorted amount as per the plan of P.L.F.I.
On 10.11.2016 at 8:30 p.m., an FIR bearing P.S. Case No.67 of 2016, registered at Bero Jharkhand against Binod Kumar (A-1), Chandra Shekhar Kumar (A-2), Nand Kishore Mahto (A-3) and Mohan Kumar (A-4), Yamuna Prasad (A-5) & A-6 (Dinesh Gope), who is P.L.F.I. Chief u/s 212, 213/34, 414 of the I.P.C. and u/s 13, 17, 40 of U.A.(P) Act, 1967 & u/s 17 of Criminal Law Amendment Act on the allegation that a sum of Rs.25.38 Lakhs (old, demonetized notes/currency) were sought to be deposited in S.B.I. Bero-Branch, Jharkhand by P.L.F.I Chief/Dinesh Gope.
In this F.I.R., the prosecution alleged that information was received that the supremo of P.L.F.I. was trying to get crime proc
Pradeep Ram vs. State of Jharkhand and Anr.
(1) Sanctioning Authority is required to apply its mind on the basis of fact gathered in course of investigation by Investigating Agency.(2) NIA can carry on further investigation and submit a supple....
The timing for raising issues regarding absence or vitiation of sanction is crucial, and a mere error, omission, or irregularity in sanction is not fatal unless it results in the failure of justice o....
The Magistrate must apply judicial mind when taking cognizance and issuing summons, ensuring sufficient grounds exist for proceeding with the case.
Cognizance cannot be taken twice for the same offence, and prosecution sanction is mandatory for public servants under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Point of Law : Criminal breach of trust - Conduct of the judicial officers concerned in passing orders on printed proforma by filling up the blanks without application of judicial mind is objectionab....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.