Harpreet Singh @ Happy Malaysia vs National Investigation Agency

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(P&H) 3283

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
LISA GILL, RITU TAGORE, JJ.
Harpreet Singh @ Happy Malaysia – Appellant
Versus
National Investigation Agency & Anr. – Respondents
CRA-D NO. 524 of 2023 (O&M) AND CRA-D NO. 503 of 2
Decided On : 10-05-2023

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Karnail Singh Ahhi, Advocate and Mr. Kunwar Rajan, Advocate; For the Appellant

Headnote:(A) The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 - Sections 13, 15, 16, 18 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 167(2) - Extension of investigation period from 90 days to 150 days upheld as justified for complex terror-related offences necessitating time-consuming investigations. (Paras 3, 11, 17)

(B) Bail - Rights of accused - Petitioner’s application for bail under Section 167(2) dismissed as infructuous due to ongoing investigation beyond statutory limit; requisite reports from Public Prosecutor not disclosed to accused. (Paras 6, 18)

Facts of the case:
The appellant, accused of being a conspirator in a bomb blast at a District Court Complex on 23.12.2021, challenged the extension of the investigation period and the denial of bail after being arrested post-deportation from Malaysia.

Findings of Court:
Sufficient grounds were found for the extension of investigations due to the extensive and serious nature of the offences, which included multiple jurisdictions and voluminous evidence being collected.

Issues: Whether the extension was justified and whether the dismissal of bail application was appropriate under the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the extension of investigative time was legally and factually warranted, confirming that the investigation's complexity justified the delay.

Result: Appeals dismissed.

Table of Content
1. joinder of appeals for hearing. (Para 1 , 2)
2. challenge against decisions regarding bail and investigation extension. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
3. arguments challenging the special judge's decision. (Para 7 , 8)
4. court's analysis of investigation extension justification. (Para 9 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
5. context of serious charges against appellant. (Para 10 , 17)
6. dismissal of appeals with no grounds for intervention. (Para 18 , 19)
7. final dismissal of the appeals. (Para 20)

JUDGMENT

Mrs. Lisa Gill, J.

This order shall dispose of CRA-D-503-2023 and CRA-D-524-2023.

2. At request and with consent of learned counsel for the appellant, both the above mentioned appeals i.e. CRA-D-503-2023 and CRA-D-524-2023 are taken up together for hearing as the controversy in said appeals is intrinsically linked with each other.

3. CRA-D-503-2023 has been filed challenging decision dated 04.03.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, NIA, Punjab, SAS Nagar, Mohali (for short - 'Special Judge') in NIA case No. RC-01/2022/NIA/DLI dated 13.02.2022 arising out of FIR No. 446/2021 dated 23.12.2021 under Sections 3 02, 307, 124A, 120B IPC; Sections 13 , 15, 16 and 18 of The Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (for short - 'the Act'); Sections 3 , 4, 5 of EXPLOSIVES ACT and Section 3 and 4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act registered at Police Station Division No. 5, District Police Commissionerate Ludhiana, Punjab, whereby appellant's application seeking concession of bail under Section 16 7 (2) of Cr.P.C. has been dismissed as infructuous on account of period of investigation being extended vide order dated 03.03.2023.

CRA-D-524-2023 has been filed by the appellant challenging decision dated 03.03.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge whereby period for investigation has been extended from 90 days to 150 days.

4. Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the matter which have been culled out from CRA-D-524-2023 for the sake of convenience are that RC-01/2022/NIA/DLI dated 13.02.2022 arising out of FIR No. 446/2021 dated 23.12.2021 under Sections 3 02, 307, 124A, 120B IPC; Sections 13 , 15, 16 and 18 of The Unlawful Activities Prevention Act; Sections 3 , 4, 5 of EXPLOSIVES ACT and Section 3 and 4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act registered at Police Station Division No. 5, District Police Commissionerate Ludhiana, Punjab was registered on the statement of ASI Sukhpal, Incharge Police Post, Court Complex Ludhiana in respect to the explosion, which took place in the washroom located on second floor of District Court Complex, Ludhiana. As a result of the explosion, one person died and six were injured with extensive damage being caused to the washroom wall adjoining record room of the Court and windows etc. It is stated that bomb blast was carried out by some anti-national elements with intention to disturb law and order, to damage Government property, to put lives of citizens at risk and to unnecessarily create panic in public. It was discovered during investigation that Gagandeep Singh son of Amarjeet Singh resident of Ludhiana, who was found dead at the spot, was the handler of bomb. He was arrayed as accused in the matter. Charge sheet was filed on 07.01.2023 against five persons namely Gagandeep Singh, Surmukh Singh @ Samu, Dilbagh Singh @ Baggo, Rajanpreet Singh and Zulfikar @ Pehalwan. Subsequently, present appellant - Harpreet Singh @ Happy Malaysia, who is stated to be one of the main conspirators, was arrested on 01.12.2022 after his deportation from Malaysia. Appellant is stated to have coordinated delivery of IED to Indian associates from Pakistan.

5. In terms of Section 43D of the Act, period of 90 days for completion of investigation were coming to an end on 01.03.2023. Application dated 22.02.2023 submitted by the Inspector of Police/CIO, NIA, Chandigarh was forwarded by the Public Prosecutor, NIA, Chandigarh seeking extension of time for investigation to 180 days.

6. Appella