In cases of grave anti-terror offenses, the principle of 'bail as a rule' is severely restricted. Prolonged pre-trial detention does not automatically entitle an accused to release if prima facie evidence indicates a link to activities threatening national security and the trial is proceeding.

JUDGMENT :

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

1. The present Appeal has been filed under section 21(4) of National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 read with Section 43-D of UAP Act to set-aside the order dated 28.2.2025 passed by AJC-XVI Ranchi-cum-Special Judge NIA, Ranchi in Misc. Criminal Application No. 316 of 2025 by which bail of the appellant has been rejected in connection with Special (NIA) Case No. 04 of 2021 dated 9.12.2021, arising out of PS ATS case no. 01/2021 Ranchi, Jharkhand registered under sections 120B of IPC and section 17 CLA Act read with sections 25(1-B)a, 26 and 35 of Arms Act and sections 13,19, 20 and 21 of UA(P)Act 1967.

2. At the outset it needs to refer herein that earlier the appellant had preferred Miscellaneous Cr. Application No. 1133 of 2022 which was rejected vide order dated 16.7.2022, against which the present appellant had preferred an appeal before this Court being Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1387 of 2022 which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 22.2.2023. Thereafter, the appellant had filed Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. 847 of 2023 before the learned Trial Court which was also rejected on 28.3.2023 and against the said order also the present appellant had filed Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 584 of 2023 before this Court which was dismissed on merit vide order dated 10.8.2023.

3. Thereafter, again the present appellant had preferred an application being Misc. Criminal Application being Misc. Criminal Application No. 672/2024 but the same was again dismissed by the special court vide order dated 08/04/2024 against which the appellant had preferred an appeal before this Court being Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 596 of 2024 which was dismissed on 04/12/2024.

4. Thereafter, again the appellant has preferred an application before the special Court being Misc. Criminal Application No. 316 of 2025 but the same was dismissed by the learned Special Judge vide order dated 28.02.2025 against which the instant appeal has been preferred.

Factual Matrix:

5. The prosecution case is based upon the typed report of sub inspector Vishal Pandey of ATS on 14.11.2021. In his typed report SI Vishal Pandey alleged that while investigation of the Tandwa P.S. Case No. 132/2021 he came to know that Avinash Kumar S/o Jairam Sharma and few other persons are supplying arms and ammunitions to miscreants and extremist groups. Thereafter, he lodged Sanha and a team of ATS was constituted. They proceeded for Imamganj, Gaya, Bihar. On 13.11.2021 Avinash Kumar was located, identified and examined during which he admitted that he along with one Rishi Kumar was supplying arms and ammunitions to the armed cadres of CPI (Maoists) and other terrorist gangs. Then the team proceeded to Benipur village, Salimpur PS Patna, Bihar and identified and apprehended accused Rishi Kumar. They stated that during the month of September 2021, co-accused Aman Sahu asked Avinash Kumar to arrange live cartridges of INSAS rifle. On getting the instruction, Avinash Kumar in association with accused Rishi Kumar collected live cartridges of 5.56 MM caliber from two persons namely Arun Kumar Singh and Pankaj Kumar Singh, the appellant herein, and embarked to make the delivery to associates of Aman Sahu. However,