SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Mad) 1996

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, N. SENTHILKUMAR, JJ.
Subair – Appellant
Versus
The National Investigation Agency – Respondent
Crl. Appeal Nos. 282, 411 of 2024, Crl. M.P. No. 4266 of 2024
Decided On : 01-10-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : R. Vivekananthan
For the Respondents: A.R.L. Sundaresan, R. Karthikeyan

The court affirmed that the NIA can seek property attachment under Section 33 of the UA(P) Act during trial, independent of the definition of proceeds of terrorism.

Headnote:(A) National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 - Section 21 - Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 - Sections 2(1)(g), 25, and 33 - Criminal appeals challenging the order of attachment of property under Section 33 of UA(P) Act - The court clarified the distinction between Sections 25 and 33, emphasizing that Section 33 allows for attachment of properties during trial, independent of the proceeds of terrorism definition - The court upheld the attachment order, confirming the legislative intent to prevent terrorism. (Paras 17-38)

(B) Jurisdiction of NIA - The court ruled that the NIA has the locus standi to file for attachment under Section 33, as it is empowered to do so during the trial phase. (Paras 24-36)

Facts of the case:
The appeals were filed against the attachment of property belonging to the accused in a case involving a terrorist act resulting in murder, with the NIA seeking to attach properties under the UA(P) Act. The attachment was contested on grounds of the property not being proceeds of terrorism.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the attachment was valid under Section 33 of the UA(P) Act, confirming the legislative intent to allow such measures during trial.

Issues: The main issues included the interpretation of Sections 25 and 33 of the UA(P) Act and the NIA's authority to file for property attachment.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that Section 33 provides a standalone power for courts to attach properties during trial, independent of the definition of proceeds of terrorism, and that the NIA has the authority to seek such attachments.

Result: Appeals dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.

Prayer: Criminal Appeals filed under Section 21 of National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, to call for the records relating to the order dated 06.02.2024 made in Crl. M.P. No. 2476 of 2023 in Spl. S.C. No. 17 of 2022 on the file of Special Court under the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (Sessions Court for Exclusive Trial of Bomb Blast and POTA Cases), Chennai at Poonamallee, Chennai-600056 and set aside the order of attachment and allow above appeals.

FACTUAL MATRIX:

1. The present criminal appeals have been instituted challenging the order dated 06.02.2024 passed in Crl. M.P. No. 2476 of 2023 in R.C. No. 03/2018/NIA/DLI.

2. The National Investigation Agency represented by Inspector of Police/respondent filed a petition under Section 33 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 [hereinafter referred as “UA(P) Act”] seeking attachment of the property of the 1st appellant/Accused No. 3, who is the son of 2nd appellant Mrs. Nabeesa Sulaiman.

2.1 It is not in dispute between the parties that the Spl. S.C. No. 17 of 2022 is pending on the file of the Special Court under the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008. Charges were framed by the Trial Court on 15th February, 2022 and at the time of filing the petition 36 prosecution witnesses deposed and examined.

3. On 22.09.2016 at about 23:15 hours, MR. C. Sasikumar, Spokesperson, Hindu Munnani (Front), Coimbatore was attacked indiscriminately by some unknown persons. He sustained grievous injuries on the neck, head, shoulder, hands and succumbed to his injuries in the KG Hospital at Coimbatore. Thudiyalur Police Station, Coimbatore Rural District registered FIR No. 735 of 2016, under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) on 23.09.2016. Initially the investigation was taken over by the Special Investigation Division, CBCID, Coimbatore, considering the gravity of the offence. The Special Investigation Division (SID), Crime Branch, Crime Investigation Department (CB-CID) came to know that the A1 to A4 being members of Popular Front of India, banned organisation, conspired to strike terror on particular section of people, and to create terror among the public at large by brutally murdering MR. C. Sasikumar. The SID, CB-CID, Coimbatore arrested A1 to A4 and subsequently they were enlarged on bail. During the course of investigation, the SID, CB-CID found that the incident was not a case of simple murder, but a terrorist act committed as part of waging violent Jihad against Non-Muslims with an intention to strike terror in a section of people and general public and to create panic among them. The above facts were confirmed through the confession statements of Sadham Hussain-A2 and Subair-A3. Accordingly, the Investigating Officer invoked Sections 120-B and 153-A of IPC and Sections 16 and 18 of UA(P) Act, 1967.

4. The Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, vide their order dated 22.01.2018 entrusted the investigation to the National Investigation Agency as per powers conferred under Section 6(4) read with Section 8 of National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (herein after referred as “NIA Act”). Accordingly, NIA took up investigation of the case by re-registering the original case on 29.01.2018. After collecting sufficient prosecutable evidence, the NIA filed chargesheet against Sadham Hussain-A2 and Subair-A3 for the commission of offence under Section 302 read with Sections 120-B, 302 read with 34, 153(A)(1)(b) of IPC and Sections 16(1)(a), 18 and 20 of UA(P) Act on 07.04.2018. Subsequently, NIA had filed supplementary chargesheet against the accused Abuthagir-A1 for the offences under Section 18 of UA(P) Act and against accused Mohammed Mubarak-A4 under Section 302 read with Sections 120B, 302 read with 34, 154(A)(1)(b) of IPC and Sections 16(1)(a), 18 and 20 UA(P) Act before the Special Court on 21.06.2018. The Special Court took cognizance of the case and numbered as C.C. No. 3 of 2018 and C.C. No. 5 of 2018 respectively and trial is unde

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top