Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Sujit Narayan Prasad, Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
Fuleshwar Gope – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through National Investigating Agency – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
1. The instant appeal preferred under Section 21 (4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 is directed against the order dated 19.05.2022 passed by the learned A.J.C.-XVI-cum-Special Judge, NIA Ranchi, in Misc. Cr. Application No. 566 of 2022 (Special (NIA) Case No.02 of 2018) corresponding to R.C. No.02/2018/NIA/DLI dated 19.01.2018, arising out of Bero P.S. Case No.67 of 2016 registered for the offence under Sections 21 2, 213, 414/34 of the I.P.C., Section 17 (ii) of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1908 and Sections 13 , 17 & 40 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for regular bail of the appellant has been rejected.
PROSECUTION CASE & FACTS
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case leading to this Criminal Appeal is that on 10.11.2016, on receiving secret information, the informant namely Mr. Bindeshwari Das, Officer In-charge of Bero P.S. registered an information received regarding the associates of Supremo of PLFI depositing ill-gotten money of crime proceed realized as extortion of levy at SBI, Bero, Ranchi. After having informed his superior authorities and having received their directi
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 upheld the denial of bail under the UAP Act, emphasizing the serious nature of the charges and the prima facie evidence against the appellant.
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 right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is imperative, and prolonged incarceration without the likelihood of a timely trial may warrant the grant of bail.
Delay in trial does not justify bail in serious offenses when a prima facie case is established against the accused.
The prolonged pretrial detention without trial is a key reason for granting bail, emphasizing the right to a timely 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....
Prolonged detention without trial violates constitutional rights; bail may be granted considering the length of custody and co-accused's bail.
The denial of bail based on serious allegations, abscondence, and the need for judicial discretion to maintain public order governs the principle of parity in bail applications.
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
