RANCHI, India, Nov. 28 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Oct. 30:

1. Heard Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned Special P.P (NIA).

2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 12.03.2025 passed in Misc. Criminal Application No. 199 of 2025 in connection with RC-05/2021/NIA/RNC arising out of Special NIA Case No.01/2022 by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVI cum Special Judge, NIA, Ranchi, whereby and whereunder the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that the Central Government had received an information that some prominent cadres of Communist Party of India (Maoist), a proscribed terrorist Organisation, Pradyuman Sharma @ Saket @ Kundan @ Sudhanshu @ Kunal @ Nakul @ Laden along with Yogendra Ravidas @ Lighter, Nagendra Giri, Abhinav @ Gaurav @ Bittu, Dhananjay Paswan [arms supplier to CPI (Maoist)] and others are conspiring to revive CPI (Maoist) in Magadh zone. It has been alleged that in furtherance to this sinister motive, they have conspired to raise funds for procurement of arms and ammunitions and imparting training of cadres of IED's fabrication and to liaise with incarcerated Naxals, OGW's in various jails for commission of terrorist activities.

4. Considering the gravity of the said offence and in exercise of the powers conferred under Sub-Section (5) of Section 6 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, CTCR Division vide Order F.No.11011/79/2021/NIA dated 27.12.2021 directed the National Investigation Agency to take-up investigation of the aforesaid case. In compliance to the said directive, NIA had registered the instant case as RC No.- 05/2021/NIA/RNC dated 30.12.2021 under Sections 16, 17, 18, 20, 38, 39 and 40 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

5. It has been submitted by Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has been implicated on the basis of recovery of some incriminating articles from his residence and the 161 Cr.P.C statements of P.W.16 and P.W.28. It has been submitted that a country made pistol, a green bore rifle and a magazine were recovered from the house of the appellant and so far as the recovery of rifle is concerned, P.W.16 who is the bodyguard of the appellant, has accepted that the rifle recovered from the house of the appellant belongs to him. P.W.16, however, has stated that he was offered money by the appellant to admit that the pistol also belonged to him and he has further stated that the appellant used to work with the naxals and the people are scared of him. So far as the statement of P.W.28 is concerned, he has stated that the appellant once had demanded levy from him. The appellant, according to Mr. Srinivasan, is a social activist and runs a dairy farm and because of such unsubstantiated allegations, he is in custody since 23.06.2023. The appellant was not arrayed as an accused either in the charge sheet or in the first supplementary charge sheet but his name figures as an accused in the second supplementary charge sheet. Out of 200 cited witnesses, the prosecution has examined only 28 witnesses and even if the number of witnesses is curtailed, the trial will take an indefinite time to conclude.

6. Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned Spl.P.P (NIA) has submitted that there are incriminating evidences on record which would reveal about the manner of the involvement of the appellant in terrorist activities. The appellant is a habitual offender and is wanted in 7 criminal cases. After pruning the number of witnesses, the same has come down to 97, out of which 35 have already been examined.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816xwSqUBlAewoFYSLAvQgIGRc9hSDsiXuSfZD6QfxhZH6A&caseno=Cr.A(DB)/643/2025&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010143892025&state_code=7&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.