IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JJ.
Niraj Kumar Alias Niraj Srivastava - Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 807 of 2024
Decided On : 19-03-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. outline of the prosecution's case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 2. summary of parties' arguments. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 3. analysis of allegations under uapa. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 4. criteria for granting bail under special statutes. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 5. evidence established against the appellant. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52) |
| 6. discussion on trial delays and custody arguments. (Para 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59) |
| 7. key distinctions between cases cited. (Para 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66) |
| 8. considerations of the principle of parity. (Para 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79) |
| 9. role of charge-sheets in determining bail. (Para 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 , 86) |
| 10. conclusion on the suitability of the bail application. (Para 87 , 88) |
| 11. final judgment on the appeal. (Para 89) |
| 12. orders passed by the court. (Para 90 , 91 , 92) |
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
1. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 21 (4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 against the order dated 24.05.2024 passed by the learned A.J.C.-XVIII-cum-Spl. Judge, ATS, Ranchi in Misc. Criminal Application No. 1543 of 2024 whereby and whereunder the prayer for regular bail of the appellant in connection with ATS Case No. 01 of 2022, registered for the offence under Sections 386 , 387, 420, 468, 471, 109, 34, 120B and 201 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and Sections 16 , 17, 18, 20 and 21 of the UA(P) Act, 1967, has been rejected.
Prosecution case and Facts:
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case leading to this Criminal Appeal is that the Superintendent of Police, A.T.S. received a secret information on 15.01.2022 that one Aman Srivastava by changing places in association with his family members and associates is realizing extortion from businessmen and receiving the money through hawala and at that time huge amount is kept with one Sidharth Sahu who is about to send the amount to Aman Srivastava and Avik Srivastava through hawala. It was also informed that they were also preparing to extort money from some more persons and planning to commit some cognizable offence. They use social media app for communication.
3. Since there is terror of the said gang in the area, the police party without wasting time, prepared for conducting raid and for that teams were constituted for raiding. The different teams raided at different places connected with Aman Srivastava and his associates and one Sanjay Karmakar was apprehended from the house of Prince Raj and from his possession one loaded revolver and 6 cartridges were recovered. He had produced license obtained from Jammu and Kashmir State, to this respect one FIR has been lodged under Arms Act.
4. The police party under the command of senior officials raided the house of one Siddarth Sahu and from the almirah of his house Rs.28,88,000/- has been recovered. On interrogation, he had disclosed that this money is belonging to Aman Srivastava gang obtained through extortion and on being directed by them one Pintu had given this money to him. Which he had to give to one Sunil.
5. He further disclosed that he is relative of Aman Srivastava and after the death of his father he is running the gang with the help of his other family members. They used to collect money from different areas. The recovered money was seized in accordance with law.
6. On 16.01.2022 search was conducted of the house of one Binod Kumar Pandey from where Rs. 5,42,000/- was recovered. He had disclosed that the money was belonging to Aman Srivastava and he was going to send the same through hawala in the accounts of Aman and Avik. Hence, the FIR being ATS (Ranchi) Case No. 01 of 2022 dated 17.01.2022 has been lodged against 12 named accused persons for the alleged for offence Under Sections 386 / 387/109/34/120 B/ 201 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , for offenc
Union of India Vs. K.A. Najeeb
Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra
National Investigation Agency v. Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali
Ranjitsing Brahmajeetsing Sharma v. State of Maharashtra
Tarun Kumar vs. Assistant Director Directorate of Enforcement
Ramesh Bhavan Rathod vs. Vishanbhai Hirabhai Makwana
In cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, bail may be denied if there is prima facie evidence of serious criminal involvement linked to national security threats.
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.
Bail under the U.A.P. Act requires prima facie assessment of allegations; long custody or parity with co-accused do not automatically justify release.
Under UA(P) Act Section 43D(5), bail denied if charge-sheet shows prima facie true accusations of terrorist gang involvement; custody/delay insufficient absent changed circumstances; parity only for ....
The court reiterated that under the UAPA, bail is the exception, emphasizing the prima facie strength of allegations against the accused involved in financing a terrorist organization.
The court ruled that prima facie evidence justifies the rejection of bail for accused involved in serious offenses under UAPA, emphasizing the need to balance individual rights with public safety.
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.