IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that interim bail cannot be granted under the NIA Act or UAPA in the absence of statutory provisions allowing for such relief.

JUDGMENT :

Sureshwar Thakur, J.

1. The instant appeal as constituted under the provisions of Section 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, is directed against the impugned order drawn on 20.11.2023, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Moga proceeded to decline the claimed facility of interim bail to the present appellant.

Factual Background

2. On 06.01.2022, a police party headed by SI Gurtej Singh was present at Canal bridge link road Mehna, for patrolling and nakabandi. After some time, a black colour vehicle bearing No. PB04AC-2831 was seen coming from the side of Chugawan, in which three persons were sitting. SI Gurtej Singh signalled them to stop the vehicle. However, the said persons did not stop and tried to flee away while running over the barricades but they were stopped by the members of the police party. As soon as the vehicle stopped, three persons sitting inside came out. The person who was sitting on the driver seat was armed with pistol, whereas the person sitting on the rear seat was having a hand grenade in his hand. The person holding pistol pointed out his pistol towards the police party with intention to kill and the person holding hand grenade tried to throw the same on the police party with intention to kill them. The accused persons were overpowered by the police party. On enquiry, the accused disclosed their names as Gurpreet Singh Gopi, Varinder Singh @ Vinda and Baljit Singh son of Baljinder Singh (appellant herein). During search of the accused persons, 2 live hand grenades were recovered from accused Baljit Singh, 6 live cartridges of 9 MM, and one 9 MM pistol with magazine was recovered from accused Gurpreet Singh whereas, one 9 MM pistol and 12 live cartridges of 9 MM and one spare magzine were recovered from accused Varinder Singh. On the statement of SI Gurtej Singh, FIR against the accused persons became registered. After completion of investigations, challan against the accused persons was presented on 07.03.2022.

3. Later on, the police vide rapat No. 43 dated 18.05.2022. added offences under Section 120-B IPC and Sections 10, 11, 13, 16, 17, 18, 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (hereinafter for short called as the UAPA). Supplementary challan against the accused persons was presented on 29.08.2022, however, the said challan was not accompanied by sanction as warranted under Section 45 of the UAPA.

4. The appellant herein filed application for grant of interim bail before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Moga. On the said application, a declining order was passed on 20.11.2023 by the learned trial Judge concerned. Feeling aggrieved, the petitionerappellant herein has challenged the said order through filing of the instant appeal before this Court.

Submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant.

5. At the outset, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, has placed reliance on the expostulations of law, as made in a verdict passed by a Division Bench of this Court, in case titled as Manjeet Singh Vs. State of Punjab, 2023 (4) RCR (Criminal) 323. The relevant paragraphs of the said verdict are extracted hereinafter:

35. But what has been urged by Mr. Rana is that the appellant cannot be kept in custody indefinitely without judicial appraisal of the material presented against him as the cognizance by the Court is barred without grant of sanction. He has urged that the liberty of a citizen is sacrosanct and the citizen cannot be deprived of the same for the failure of the authorities to discharge the mandate of law to decide the issue of sanction within the period prescribed. He stressed the very least that can be done in such a situation is that if sanction is not accorded, then on the expiry of the period prescribed under the Rules for grant of sanction, the accused should be released on bail. If after receipt of sanction the Court decides to proceed it may pass necessary orders under the provisions of 437(5) or 439(2) of the Cr.P.C