The main legal point established in the judgment is that once an accused is remanded to judicial custody, he cannot be sent back to police custody for the same investigation, and further interrogation is not barred after the expiry of the initial remand period.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. Anil Kumar, learned A.S.G.I., appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Sabyasanchi, learned counsel for the sole opposite party.

2. Seeing the urgency in the matter vide order dated 12.10.2023, notice was directed to be served upon the sole opposite party through Dasti, pursuant to that notice has been issued and served upon the opposite party and affidavit to that effect has been filed by the petitioner herein. Mr. Sabyasanchi has appeared on behalf of the sole opposite party.

3. This criminal revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 16.09.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge (PMLA), Ranchi rejecting the remand application filed under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. read with Section 65 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) for remand of the accused Sunil Yadav, who is the sole opposite party in this petition.

4. ECIR No. 03/2022 was registered on 08.03.2022 on the basis of FIR No.85/2020 dated 22.06.2020 registered by Barharwa Police Station, Sahibganj District, Jharkhand under Sections 147, 149, 341, 342, 323, 379, 504, 506 read with 120-B of the Indian Penal Code against Pankaj Mishra and others on the basis of the complaint of one Shri Sambhu Nandan Kumar, who was threatened and obstructed on 22.06.2020 by the persons accused in the FIR, to participate in the tender for Barharwa Toll. It was alleged by the complainant that he was asked by the accused Pankaj Mishra over the phone, not to participate in the tender, on the refusal of which, he was attacked by the mob at the behest of Pankaj Mishra.

5. Mr. Anil Kumar, learned A.S.G.I., appearing for the petitioner submits that the matter relates to illegal mining in the District of Sahibganj. He further submits that even the National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in the case of Sayyed Arshad Nasar v. Union of India & others noted the concern of illegal mining in the State of Jharkhand. He submits that there are several other FIRs lodged in the matter of the illegal mining in Sahibganj district and its adjoining areas, but still illegal activities have not stopped. He submits that the investigation revealed about huge illegal mining activities in Sahibganj along with transportation of such stolen minerals through roads, railways and inland vessels. He also submits that during the course of investigation, various persons were arrested by the Directorate of Enforcement, namely, Pankaj Mishra, Bachhu Yadav, Prem Prakash and Pashupati Yadav and others. He further submits that the petitioner filed a prosecution complaint under Section 45 read with Section 44 of the PMLA against accused Pankaj Mishra, Bachhu Yadav, Prem Prakash on 16.09.2022 and subsequently first supplementary prosecution complaint was filed against Pashupati Yadav on 19.06.2023 and second supplementary prosecution complaint was filed against other accused persons, in which, cognizance has been taken by the learned Court. He further submits that the sole opposite party namely Sunil Yadav was not apprehended and that is why on the application filed by the Directorate of Enforcement, learned Court has issued non-bailable warrant on 29.10.2022 and the Superintendent of Police, Sahibganj was directed to execute the same and in spite of that, he was not arrested and, therefore, proclamation under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. were directed to be issued on 14.12.2022 and 31.03.2023 respectively. He submits that finally the sole opposite party was arrested on 25.08.2023 by the Superintendent of Police, Sahibganj and he was produced before the learned Court of Special Judge, PMLA, Ranchi on 26.08.2023 and later on sent to the judicial custody. He further submits that the brother of the sole opposite party, namely, Rajesh Yadav @ Dahu Yadav is still absconding and could not be traced till date. He submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court directed Rajesh Yadav @ Dahu Yadav to appear before the I.O. within a period of two weeks while rejecting his Special Leave Petition (Criminal)