Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Anem Hassa Purty @ Anem – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The instant appeal filed under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, is directed against the order dated 16.11.2024 passed in M.C.A. No. 2823 of 2024 by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner, XVI- cum-Special Judge, NIA, Ranchi in connection with Special NIA Case No. 04 of 2020(S), RC 39/2020/NIA/Delhi arising out of Tiruldih P.S. Case No. 16 of 2019, registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 379, 302, 353 and 435 of the Indian Penal Code; under Section 27 of the Arms Act and under Section 17 of the CLA as well as under Section 13 of U.A.(P) Act; subsequently second supplementary charge-sheet was submitted under Sections 120(B), 121, 121(A), 396 IPC and under Sections 16, 18, 20, 38 and 39 of the U.A. (P) Act, whereby and whereunder the prayer for regular bail of the appellant has been rejected.
2. It has been contended on behalf of appellant that the appellant is not named in the FIR and no specific attributablity has been assigned against the appellant and name of the appellant has come in the confessional statement of co-accused. It has further been submitted that neither any incriminating materials has been recovered from the possession of
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 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 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 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.
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....
(1) If Court is satisfied after examining material on record that there are no reasonable grounds for believing that accusation against accused is prima facie true, then accused is entitled to bail.(....
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.
The completion of investigation and prolonged judicial custody are significant factors in determining the entitlement to bail under UAPA. The court emphasized the mandatory requirements under Section....
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
