Back
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, NAVNEET KUMAR
Prasanta Basu @ Prashant Bose @ Kishan Da @ Manish @ Budha – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
1. The instant appeals preferred under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 are directed against the orders dated 11.07.2022 passed in B.P. No.160 of 2022 (Prasanta Basu @ Prashant Bose @ Kishan Da @ Manish @ Budha) and B.P. No.161 of 2022 (Shila Marandi @ Shila Hansda @ Shilla Hansda) by Principal District & Sessions Judge, Seraikella and against order dated 22.09.2022 passed in B.P. No.220 of 2022 (Rupesh Kumar Singh) by the District and Additional Sessions Judge-II, Seraikella in connection with Kandra P.S. Case No.67 of 2021 registered for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of the I.P.C. Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act and Sections 10 and 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, whereby and whereunder, the prayers’ for regular bail of the appellants have been rejected.
2. Since these criminal appeals are preferred in connection with the same case (Kandra P.S. Case No.67 of 2021) therefore, these appeals are decided with the common order.
Facts
3. The brief facts of the prosecution case leading to these Criminal Appeals are like that on basis of written report of one Sanjay Kumar Singh, S.D.P.O. Chandil wherei
The judgment establishes the principle that bail may be rejected if there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusations made are prima facie true, especially in cases involving serious of....
Bail – Being a member of banned organization is also an offence under UA(P) Act and bail can be declined.
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 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....
The court confirmed that under Section 43D(5) of UAPA, bail cannot be granted if there are reasonable grounds to believe the accusations are prima facie true.
The court upheld the denial of bail under UAPA, emphasizing the serious nature of the allegations and the prima facie case against the appellant, which posed a threat to national security.
The court established that for bail applications under the UAP Act, the prosecution must provide reasonable grounds for believing the accusations are prima facie true, and that mere membership in a b....
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....
The court established that a prima facie case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act requires a lighter evidentiary burden, allowing for bail denial where reasonable grounds for believing acc....
The court upheld the denial of bail under the UAP Act, emphasizing the serious nature of the charges and the prima facie evidence against the appellant.
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
