IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, SUBHASH CHAND, JJ.
Ajay Turi, Son of Dinesh Turi - Appellant
Versus
National Investigation Agency - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (DB) No.133 of 2023
Decided On : 17-05-2023
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 147, 148, 149, 353, 504, 506, 307, 427, 435, 386, 387, 120B, 121A and 216 - Arms Act - Section 25(1)(b), 26, 27 and 35 – Offence of Rioting,armed with deadly weapon – Criminal Intimidation – Criminal Conspiracy – Bail – Held, Court, on basis of material available in chargesheet/supplementary chargesheet, is of opinion that the accusation against appellant is prima facie true, as compared to opinion of accused not guilty of such offence which is being claimed on basis of no conclusive report of Central Forensic Science Laboratory for ascertaining hand script over pamphlets – Other prosecution witnesses have supported case of prosecution against appellant, as also by taking into consideration provision as contained has come to conclusion that accusation against appellant is prima facie true in comparison to opinion of accused not guilty and in that view of matter, learned trial court has not been satisfied to extend benefit of regular bail – Appeal dismissed
ORDER :
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
The instant appeal preferred under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 is directed against the order dated 04.01.2023 passed by learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVI-cum-Special Judge, NIA, Ranchi whereby and whereunder the prayer for bail in connection with NIA Case RC-01/2021/NIA/RNC registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 353, 504, 506, 307, 427, 435, 386, 387, 120B, 121A and 216 of the Indian Penal Code Section 25(1)(b), 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act, Section 3 & 4 of Explosive Substance Act, Section 10, 13, 16(1)(b), 20 and 23 of UA(P) Act and Section 17 of CLA Act, 1908, has been rejected.
2. The prosecution case is based on the information received by Balumath police station that at about 19 hours on 18.12.2020, some unknown persons were burning vehicles by firing indiscriminately near check post no.1 near Tetariakhand colliery. Assailants fired on the police party that had rushed to the spot. Accused persons had burnt four trucks one motorcycle and injured four civilians. The remnants of the burnt vehicles, fragments of a cane bomb with wire, a white colour empty gallon of approx 02 liters, spent cartridges and three hand written pamphlets containing threats to the transporters and coal companies, involved in the mining area signed by one Pradip Ganjhu (A-3) were found from the spot. Upon further inquiry it was revealed that gangster Sujit Sinha(A-1) and Aman Sahu @Aman Sao(A-2) had conspired with accused Pradeep Ganjhu (A-3) and his associates namely Santosh Ganjhu, Bihari Ganjhu, Sakendra Ganjhu, Pramod Ganjhu and others to collect extortion from CCL transporters, contractors, DO holders and disruption of legitimate works. Accordingly, Balumath PS case no 234/2020 dated 19.12.2020 was registered u/s 147, 148, 149, 353, 504, 506, 307, 427, 435, 386, 387 and 120B of IPC section 27 of Arms Act, Section 3/4 of the Explosive Substance Act, against Sujit Sinha, Aman Sahu @ Aman Sao, Pradeep Ganjhu, Santosh Ganjhu, Bihari Ganjhu, Pramod Ganjhu, and 5-6 other unknown accused persons.
The ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) Government of India in view of the gravity of the offence and its cross border and international ramification issued orders in exercise of the powers vested under Section 5(5) read with section 8 of the NIA Act 2008 vide F. No. 11011/01/2020/NIA dated 7.1.2020, directed the NIA to take up the investigation of the aforesaid case. On the direction of the. Ministry of Home Affairs NIA re-registered case no 01/2021/NIA-RNC dated 4.3.2021 under section 147, 148, 149, 353, 504, 506, 307, 427, 435, 386, 387, 120B,, 121A, 216 of IPC Section 25(1)(b), 26, 27 and 35 of Arms Act section of Explosive Substance Act section 17 CLA Act and section 10, 13, 16(1), (b), 20 and 23 UA(P) Act.
After investigation NIA submitted chargesheet against Sujit Sinha (A 1), Aman Sahu (A 2), Pradip Gajhu alias Mandalji alias Premji (A-3), Santosh Gajhu (A 4), Bihari Ganjhu alias Bahira (A 5), Sakendra Ganjhu (A 6), Pramod Ganjhu (A7), Babulal Turi alias Prabhatji alias Prabhatji alias Guruji alias Avinashji alias Shankarji (A 8), Ajay Turi (A 9)(petitioner), Santosh Kumar alias Banti Yadav alias Banti Yadav (A 10), Prabhat Kumar Yadav alias Dimple Yadav (A 11), Pritam Kumar alias Chinku (A 12), Santosh Kumar Yadav (A13), Jasim Ansari (A14), Wasim Ansari (A15), petitioner Majibul Ansari (A16) and Jahiruddin Ansari alias Guddu (A17) u/s 147, 148, 149, 353, 504, 506, 307, 427, 435, 386, 387, 120B, 121A, 216 of IPC, section 25(1) (6), 26, 27, 35 of Arms Act, section 3/4 of Explosive Substance Act, section 17 of CLA act, 1908 and section 10, 13, 16(1) (b), 20, 23 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
3. It appears from the material available on record that on the basis of the written report Balumath PS case no 234/2020 dated 19.12.2020 was registered u/s 147, 148, 149, 353, 504,
Sudesh Kedia v. Union of India reported in (2021) 4 SCC 704
The court established that under the UAPA, particularly Section 43D(5), the standard for denying bail is based on whether the accusations are prima facie true, which requires a careful examination of....
The court established that involvement with a banned terrorist organization and the collection of levies for such groups constitutes serious offenses under the UA(P) Act, warranting denial of bail wh....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for a surface analysis of probative value of evidence at the stage of examining the question of granting bail, and the requirement for rea....
The court upheld the rejection of bail, finding prima facie evidence of the appellant's involvement in arms smuggling under the UAPA, despite his claims of insufficient evidence.
Bail – Being a member of banned organization is also an offence under UA(P) Act and bail can be declined.
The existence of a prima facie case, the gravity of the offence, the severity of punishment, the antecedent of the appellant, and the possibility of the appellant impeding the trial once he is releas....
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.