Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, NAVNEET KUMAR, JJ.
Pankaj Kumar Singh, S/o. Sri Shyam Nandan Singh - Appellant
Versus
Union of India through National Investigation Agency - Respondent
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 584 of 2023
Decided On : 10-08-2023
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 120B – National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 – Section 21(4) – U.A.P. Act, 1967 – Section 25(1-b) A/26/35, 13, 19, 20, 21 – CLA Act – Section 17 – Criminal Conspiracy – Criminal Application – Purpose of extortion – Commission of offence – Judicial custody – Held, Court, by making assessment of charges levelled against, A-1, is of view that case of appellant, as per extract of counter affidavit, is almost identical to that of case – Court, on basis of basis of discussion made hereinabove, is of the view that appellant in connivence with A-1, who happens to be a constable in CRPF and A-9, who happens to be a constable in BSF, has been found involved in supply of arms and ammunitions to banned terrorist organization and extremist groups – Court, prima facie, is of view that complicity of appellant is there – After having discussed fact in entirety, since has passed impugned order, therefore, based upon reasons as discussed hereinabove, Court is of view that impugned order requires no interference – Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
1. The instant appeal under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 is directed against the order dated 28.03.2023 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVI-cum-Spl. Judge, NIA, Ranchi in Misc. Criminal Application No. 847 of 2023 arising out of ATS Ranchi P.S. Case No. 01 of 2021 corresponding to Special (NIA) Case No. 4 of 2021, by which the prayer for regular bail of the appellant has been rejected.
2. The prosecution story in brief as per the allegation made in the FIR, read as under :
The Central Government received an information regarding the registration of FIR No. 01/2021 dated 14.11.2021 P.S. ATS, Ranchi, Jharkhand, u/s. 120-B of IPC, Section 17 of CLA Act, Section 25(1-b) A/26/35 and Section 13, 19, 20, 21 of U.A.P. Act, 1967 related to supply of arms and ammunition to maoist organization and criminals.
The accused Avinash Kumar @ Chunnu, Rishi Kumar, Pankaj Kumar, Sanjay Kumar Singh, Mujahid Khan and others, being members of the gang involved in unlawful activities, have criminally conspired to supply arms and ammunitions to the cadres of the Communist party of India (Maoists), and to the members of the terrorist gang of Aman Sahu. The arms and ammunitions so provided are being used to execute terrorist attacks on the security forces by the Maoists. The members of the Aman Sahu gang are using the said arms and ammunitions to fire at different places and injure persons for the purpose of extortion. The above conspirators have been holding arms unlawfully and have been string them for their further supply to the members of CPI (Maoist). They are also harbouring the members of the terrorist gang of Aman Sahu and are involved in holding the proceeds derived out of this unlawful activity of supporting the terrorist. Whereas it has been found that civil contractors Mujahid khan and Sanjay Singh have been working closely with the members of the CPI(Maoist) by providing them funds and other essential supplies for furthering their terrorist activities. Mujahid khan supplied 250 live rounds (ammunition) of INSAS to the Maoists. For procuring these rounds Mujahid Khan paid Rs.1,75,000/- to the accused Rishi Kumar. The said conspirators were procuring the arms and ammunitions illegally and were storing them at different locations, for their onward supplies. 450 rounds of 5.56 MM ammunitions were recovered by the police near the Sheikh Bhikhan Memorial of Chutupalu Ghati on the pointing out of the accused Rishi Kumar and Avinash Kumar. These rounds were to be supplied to the terrorist gang of Aman Sahu. Apart from the ammunitions, the conspirators are also procuring country made pistols and are supplying it to the members of the terrorist gangs.
3. It appears from the record that initially FIR was instituted by the Anti-Terrorist Squad being ATS Ranchi P.S. Case No. 01 of 2021 for commission of offence under Section 120-B of IPC, Section 17 of CLA Act, Section 25(1-b) A/26/35 and Section 13, 19, 20, 21 of U.A.P. Act, 1967.
The Central Government in exercise of power conferred under sub-section (5) of Section 6 read with Section 8 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 vide order no. 11011/73/2021/NIA dated 03.12.2021 directed the NIA to take the investigation.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is innocent and has committed no offence as also has falsely been implicated in this case. There is alle
The court affirmed that continued detention is warranted due to the serious allegations of conspiracy to supply arms to terrorist organizations and the ongoing nature of the trial.
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 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.
There is no material on record to show that the said finding of the learned Special Judge was erroneous.
Bail once granted cannot be cancelled without any compelling reasons.
The court established that under the UA(P) Act, particularly Section 43D(5), bail can be denied if there are reasonable grounds to believe the accusations against the accused are prima facie true, em....
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
