Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, SUBHASH CHAND, JJ.
Fuleshwar Gope – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, through The Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs and Others - Respondents.
W.P.(Cr.) No. 443 of 2022
Decided on : 21-03-2023
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 120B –Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 – Sections 17, 18, 21, 22C – Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908 – Section 17(i) & (ii) – Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India inter-alia for reliefs – Facts of case as per prosecution story is that petitioner is a poor farmer and works for a contractor on daily wage basis – He does not have any criminal antecedents – Held, Court, after considering judicial pronouncements as referred hereinabove and taking into consideration material placed before learned Special Judge, is of view that due application of mind has been applied after giving due consideration to culpability of petitioner and thereafter, learned 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 the C.L.A. Act, 1908 – Court considering law as settled and taking into consideration approach of learned Special Judge while taking cognizance by dealing with material placed before it by way of case diary, statement of various prosecution witnesses apart from various documents and material exhibits, since has taken cognizance, therefore, is of view that the same requires no interference – 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: –
(II) For quashing suo-moto letter No. F. No. 11011/51/2017/IS-IV 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.
3. 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).
4. 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).
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. In this F.I.R., the prosecution alleged that information was received that the supremo of P.L.F.I. was trying to ge
(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....
Cognizance cannot be taken twice for the same offence, and prosecution sanction is mandatory for public servants under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Errors in sanction for prosecution can be raised during trial, and further investigation is permissible under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C.
The Magistrate must apply judicial mind when taking cognizance and issuing summons, ensuring sufficient grounds exist for proceeding with the case.
Bare perusal of Section 17A of P.C. Act would indicate bar for enquiry, inquiry or investigation into an offence under the P.C. Act is on the Police Officer.
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
