Back
SUMAN SHYAM, MIR ALFAZ ALI
National Investigation Agency Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. Of India, Rep. By The Superintendent Of Police, NIA – Appellant
Versus
Akhil Gogoi, S/O Late Boluram @ Bolu Gogoi – Respondent
Key Points: - The appeal challenges a High Court order granting bail to the respondent, Akhil Gogoi, after the submission of a charge-sheet [14000301270001]. - The respondent was granted bail by the Special Court, NIA, on furnishing a bond of Rs. 30,000/- [14000301270004]. - The appellant (NIA) argued that the respondent led a violent protest, causing damage to property and injury to police personnel, and conspired to attack a community [14000301270006]. - The appellant contended that the respondent's role was as incriminating as that of co-accused (A-3 and A-4) whose bail was previously rejected [14000301270008]. - The respondent's counsel argued that the charge-sheet did not disclose ingredients to presume guilt under Section 15 of the Unlawful Assemblies (Prevention) Act, 1967 [14000301270010]. - The court analyzed the definitions of "terrorist act" and "unlawful activity" under the Unlawful Assemblies (Prevention) Act, 1967 [14000301270017][14000301270018]. - The court noted that for an act to be a "terrorist act" under Section 15(1)(a), it must be done with the intent to threaten the unity, integrity, security, or sovereignty of India, or to strike terror, using specific means [14000301270021][14000301270023]. - The court found that the materials on record, including witness statements and documents, indicated that the respondent delivered provocative speeches leading to violence and damage, but the court considered whether this constituted a "terrorist act" with the requisite intent [14000301270033][14000301270034][14000301270036]. - The court held that the views expressed by the Special Court in granting bail were a possible view, and in cases where two views are possible, an appellate court is hesitant to interfere with a discretionary power [14000301270040][14000301270041]. - The court distinguished the present case from the bail rejection of accused Nos. 3 and 4, noting the presence of photographs showing them brandishing swords [14000301270043]. - The appeal was dismissed as devoid of merit [14000301270045].
JUDGMENT :
Suman Shyam, J.
Heard Mr. D. Saikia, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. N. Satyanarayan, Addl. P.P., NIA, appearing for the appellant. We have also heard Mr. K. N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel representing the sole respondent.
2. This appeal, filed by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, is directed against the judgment and order dated 01.10.2020 passed by the Judge, Special Court, NIA, Assam, Guwahati, in Misc. Case(NIA) No.22/2020 arising out of Special NIA Case No.03/2020, allowing the respondent to go on bail after submission of charge-sheet by the Investigating Agency.
3. The facts of the case, in a nutshell, are as under :
On 10.12.2019, Sri Tulumoni Duwarah, Sub-Inspector of Police, Chabua Police Station, in the district of Dibrugarh, had lodged an ejahar inter-alia stating that on 09.12.2019, while he was on law and order duty in Chabua Town, a 6000 persons strong crowd, led by the respondent, had caused economic blockade and had pelted stones, one of which had hit him on his face causing grievous injury. In the FIR, it has also been alleged th
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
