HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAMESH SINHA, CJ., BIBHU DATTA GURU , J.
Union of India Through National Investigation Agency – Appellant
Versus
Dinesh Tati, S/o. Masa Tati – Respondent
CRA No. 551 of 2025
Decided On : 02-07-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding the trial court's rejection of the application. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court observations on the application of section 306 and relevant case law. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 14 , 15 , 17) |
| 4. ratio decidendi concerning the role of accomplice testimony. (Para 12 , 16) |
| 5. conclusion and order remanding the matter for reconsideration. (Para 18 , 19) |
Judgment :
Ramesh Sinha , CJ.
1. Heard Mr. B.Gopa Kumar and Mr. Himanshu Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant / Union of India.
2. As per the office report dated 21.04.2025, it transpires that the notice has been served to the respondent on 29.03.2025 and the matter has been taken up today, but on behalf of the respondent, no counsel is present to contest the present appeal filed by the Union of India, hence Court proceeds to hear the matter.
3. The appeal is preferred by the appellant against the order dated 07.02.2025, passed by the learned NIA Special Court, Jagdalpur refusing the application filed under Section 306(1) of Cr.P.C. (343 of the BNSS) for grant of permissions to tender pardon to one of the accused persons-cum-surrendered naxal.
4. Brief facts of the case are that a crime was registered on 16/06/2023 by the Kotwali Police Station, District Bijapur having Crime No. 68/2023 under Section 8(1)(3) (5) of Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act 2005.The allegations inscribed therein in the report in brief are that the Kotwali Police had arrested one person, Dinesh Tati, Son of- Masa Tati, resident of Palnar, PS Gangalur, District- Bijapur, Chhattisgarh. During personal search, a black colour bag containing Rs. Ten Lakh (Rs. 2000x500) notes was found to be kept in yellow polythene cover, one pass book, 80 naxal pamphlets, and some medicines which were seized. Upon examination of the said accused Dinesh Tati, he revealed that he had received the said amount of Rs. Ten Lakhs from a Surrendered Naxal (named 'A' as mentioned by the Hon'ble Court of Special Judge, Jagdalpur), Shanti Hemla (Area Committee Member), Pandru Pottam (Area Commander in Chief), all belonging to proscribed terrorist organization CPI (Maoist). Further the above accused persons told Dinesh Tati to purchase a tractor out of this money from John Deer Tractor at showroom Majiguda, Bijapur, Chhattisgarh and while returning he was directed to go to Kandulanar and hand over the 80 Naxal pamphlets to Venkat @ Vishwanath, Bhopalpatnam Local Organization Squad Commander of Madded Area Committee. Subsequent to that later on, during the course of investigation by the state police Sec 10, 13 (1)(2), 39,40 of UA(P) Act 1967 were also invoked.
The Central Government had received information regarding registration of F.I.R. No.68/2023 dated 16/06/2023 at Kotwali Police Station, District Bijapur. Subsequent to the above turn of events, the Central Government was of the view that Scheduled Offence under the NIA Act, 2008 has been committed and giving full regard to the gravity of the offences and security ramifications, it was found to be necessary that the offence need to be investigated by the National Investigation Agency in accordance with the provisions of NIA Act 2008. In pursuance of the opinion formed thus by Central Government, an order was issued exercising power under Section 6(4)(5) read with Section 8 of NIA Act 2008 on 27/03/2024 to take over the matter.
In furtherance to the above order of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, (CTCR Division), New Delhi Order no 11011/35/2024/NIA dated 04/03/2024 and 27/03/2024, the NIA has re-registered the said F.I.R. as RC No.- 17/2024/NIA/RPR on 04/04/2024.
The appellant is a Central Government Agency established by the Indian Government at the National level to investigate and prosecute offences affecting the sovereignty, security, integrity as well as economic security of the country. It has been established after the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks as need for a Central Agency to combat ter
Prithipal Singh vs. State of Punjab
Court clarified the procedure for granting pardon to accomplices under Section 306 Cr.P.C., emphasizing its critical role in prosecuting serious offenses while ensuring adherence to legal standards.
The provisions of Section 306(4)(a) of the Cr.P.C. are not attracted if an accused is tendered pardon after the commitment by the Court to which the proceeding is committed in exercise of powers unde....
The court established that a trial court should not prejudge the merits of evidence when considering an application for granting pardon under Section 306 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Revisional power under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. can be exercised by the Court suo-motu particularly to examine the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or orde....
The grant of pardon is within the exclusive domain of the Court and is subject to the condition that the proposed approver makes a full and true disclosure of the circumstances within their knowledge....
Secrecy of crime and paucity of evidence, solely for the apprehension of the other offenders, recovery of the incriminating objects and production of the evidence otherwise unobtainable might afford ....
The court ruled that a second application for pardon under Section 306 of the Cr.P.C. is maintainable only on changed circumstances, and recording a confession statement prior to granting pardon is i....
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.