The main legal point established in the judgment is that the payment of extortion money does not necessarily amount to terror funding, and the court must assess the prima facie truth of the accusations under UAPA provisions.

ORDER :

Shree Chandrashekhar, J.

This criminal appeal has been preferred by Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Singh under section 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, challenging the order dated 27th June 2020 passed in Misc. Cr. Application No. 330 of 2020.

2. The aforesaid Misc. Cr. Application was filed by the appellant seeking bail in connection to R.C. Case No. 06/2018/NIA/DLI registered on 16th February 2018 which was renumbered as Special (NIA) Case No. 03 of 2018.

3. The appellant was made accused in 2nd supplementary charge-sheet filed in Special (NIA) Case No. 03 of 2018 in which cognizance of the offence under section 384 read with section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, sections 17 and 18 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (in short, UAPA) and section 17 of the CLA Act has been taken.

4. This criminal appeal was filed on 05th September 2020 and taken up for hearing on 1st October 2020. On that day, hearing of this criminal appeal was postponed on request of the learned counsel for the NIA for filing counter-affidavit in the matter. A request seeking four weeks' further time for filing counter-affidavit was made again on 7th January 2021 and 23rd February 2021. It appears that on 14th July 2021 one of the Hon'ble Judges hearing this criminal appeal expressed his inability to hear the matter and, accordingly, the case records were placed before Hon'ble the Chief Justice for fresh assignment. This criminal appeal has been assigned to DB-III by virtue of the order dated 28th October 2021 passed by Hon'ble the Chief Justice on the administrative side and this matter was listed before us for the first time on 24th January 2022.

5. The appellant is in custody since 10th January 2020.

6. From the materials on record, we gather that the history of the present case starts with registration of Tandwa PS Case No. 2 of 2016 on 11th January 2016 against Binod Kumar Ganjhu, Munesh Ganjhu, Pradeep Ram, Birbal Ganjhu, Gopal Singh Bhokta @ Brijesh Ganjhu, Mukesh Ganjhu @ Muneshwar Ganjhu, Koharam Ji, Akraman Ji @ Ravinder Ganjhu, Anishchay Ganjhu, Deepu Singh @ Bhikhan, Bindu Ganjhu @ Bindeshwar Ganjhu and Bhikhan Ganjhu who on the basis of a raid conducted in the intervening night of 10/11th January 2016 at the house of Binod Kumar Ganjhu were made accused on the allegation of running an extortion racket by them. In course of the search several incriminating articles including huge cash were recovered from an almirah in the house of Binod Kumar Ganjhu who suffered a disclosure statement that he was collecting extortion money for TPC supremo Gopal Singh Bhokta @ Brijesh Ganjhu and other persons. Birbal Ganjhu and Munesh Ganjhu who were also present in the house of Binod Kumar Ganjhu at the time of raid made their confessional statements about their proximity with TPC. On the basis of the disclosures made by these persons a search was conducted at the premises of Pradeep Ram and from there also several incriminating articles and huge cash were recovered.

7. Accordingly, Tandwa PS Case No. 2 of 2016 was registered under sections 414/384/386/387 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code; sections 25(1-b) (a), 26/35 of the Arms Act; section 17(1)(2) of the CLA Act and a charge-sheet was submitted on 10th March 2016. It appears that subsequently the offence under section 16, 17, 20 and 23 of UAPA were added in the report on 12th April 2017. NIA took up investigation of the case and the aforesaid First Information Report was re-registered as Special (NIA) Case No. 03 of 2018 and recommended prosecution of 16 persons for which an order was issued on 19th December 2018 by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India.

8. 1st supplementary charge-sheet was submitted by NIA on 21st December 2018 against 16 persons including five of the accused who were named in Tandwa PS Case No. 2 of 2016. At this stage it would be relevant to indicate that co-accused Sanjay Jain was sent-up for trial in 1 st supplementary charge-sheet submitted by NIA.

9. 2nd s