IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
NAVIN CHAWLA, SHALINDER KAUR, JJ.
Alemla Jamir - Appellant
Versus
National Investigation Agency - Respondent
CRL.A.-606 of 2024
Decided on : 13-01-2025
JUDGMENT :
SHALINDER KAUR, J.
1. The present appeal under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act, 2008 has been preferred against the Order dated 31.05.2024, whereby the second bail application of the appellant was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge - 03 (ASJ), Special Courts (NIA)- New Delhi, Patiala House Courts, Delhi in NIA Case No. 1/2020 titled National Investigation Agency vs. Alemla Jamir & Anr.
BRIEF FACTS
2. The investigation in this case was launched, when on 17.12.2019, the appellant Alemla Jamir (A-1) while travelling from Delhi to Dimapur, Nagaland was intercepted by the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) Security Personnel at the Terminal-1 of the Indira Gandhi International Airport (IGI), New Delhi upon discovery of her carrying Rs. 72 Lakhs in cash, without providing any explanation as to its source. This information was forwarded to the Air Intelligence Unit (AIU) of the Income Tax Department and the appellant was taken in for interrogation, along with her belongings which included the said cash recovered from her.
3. Subsequent thereto, the appellant was questioned by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Investigation) and her statement was duly recorded, wherein she stated that the said cash of Rs. 72 lakhs belongs to Nationalist Socialist Council of Nagaland (Isaac-Muivah) [NSCN(IM)] and was handed over to her on the directions of Mr. Muivah, General Secretary of NSCN(IM) to be taken to Dimapur, Nagaland.
4. The appellant was then taken for interrogation by the Special Cell on 17.12.2019. Since, it was found that the large amount of money recovered from her was to be used for carrying out operations of an alleged terrorist gang, that is, NSCN(IM) and other terrorist activities in India, a complaint was lodged by the Sub-Inspector Gautam Mallick, on the basis of which an FIR bearing no. 228/2019 was registered on the same day by the Special Cell against the appellant for the offences under Sections 10, 13, 17, 18, 20 & 21 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 [UA(P) Act]. Upon which, the appellant was arrested on 18.12.2019 by the Special Cell. The investigation of the case, vide the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) order no. 11011/63/2019/NIA dated 20.12.2019, was handed over to the NIA and the FIR was re-registered as RC No.26/2019/NIA/DLI.
5. During the course of investigation, the appellant gave a disclosure statement of having collected the cash amount of Rs. 72 lakhs on the directions of Mr. Muivah from his residence at Lodhi Estate, New Delhi, out of which she had to deliver Rs. 70 lakhs to Mrs. Muivah at Dimapur and the rest Rs. 2 lakhs were to be kept by her for personal expenses. The Call Data Records (‘CDR’) of the appellant’s mobile phone, analyzed by the investigating agency, corroborated her location in the house of Mr. Muivah on 16.12.2019.
6. The appellant also disclosed that she was the member of NSCN(IM) and her husband, namely Phungting Shimrang @ P H Shimrang @ Jamis Jamir, was its ex-Army Chief. She also admitted that her husband, along with other individuals, had gone to China in October, 2019 to take assistance from the Chinese Authorities for helping them in ‘Naga Cause’ in their fight against India. The NIA also found that the NSCN(IM) was a terrorist gang with a trained army and sophisticated weaponry, claiming to have enacted its own ‘Naga Army Act’. The NSCN(IM) was accused of running a parallel government under the nomenclature of Government of People’s Republic of Nagalim (GPRN). The objective of GPRN, behind forming a full-fledged Army, was to threaten the unity, integrity,security and sovereignty of India. The organization had also usurped the sovereign Government function of collecting taxes and used to collect various taxes such as Employee Tax, Ration Tax, Vehicle Tax, Royalty, Import and Export / Gate pass Tax etc.
7. The investigation further revealed that the appellant, in connivance with Masasasong AO (A-2), he
Bail under the UA(P) Act is an exception; courts must assess prima facie evidence and risks of tampering or flight before granting bail.
The court emphasized the importance of prima facie evidence, the right to a speedy trial, and the lack of incriminating material in the possession of the accused.
Bail under UAPA is an exception; serious charges and prima facie evidence against the accused justify denial of bail.
The court upheld the bail granted to the accused, emphasizing the importance of a speedy trial and the absence of any bail condition violations, despite serious charges under the UAPA.
The completion of investigation and prolonged judicial custody are significant factors in determining the entitlement to bail under UAPA. The court emphasized the mandatory requirements under Section....
The main legal point established is that the grant of bail under UAPA requires a prima facie view of the accused's involvement, balancing of various factors, and imposition of stringent conditions to....
The right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is imperative, and prolonged incarceration without the likelihood of a timely trial may warrant the grant of bail.
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.