Allowed

Majibul Ansari v. the National Investigating Agency New Delhi

Jharkhand HC22 Mar 2023Cr.A(DB)/42/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An appeal against the rejection of bail in an NIA case. The High Court of Jharkhand quashed the order and released the appellant on bail, relying on Section 43-D(5) of the UAP Act and a precedent set for co-accused.

What did the court decide?

The order rejecting bail is quashed and set aside; the appellant is released on bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties.

Majibul Ansari Vs the National Investigating Agency New… — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

------

¶4

Cr. Appeal (DB) No.42 of 2023

¶5

------

¶6

Majibul Ansari …. …. Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

The National Investigating Agency, New Delhi, NIA Building, Opposite Dyal Singh College Road, CGO Complex, Pragati Vihar, New Delhi, PIN110003 .... .... Respondent

¶9

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND

¶10

------

¶11

For the Appellant : Mr. Mukesh Bihar Lal, Advocate For the NIA : Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Spl. P.P.

¶12

------

¶13

05/Dated:22^nd March,2023 Per Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

¶14

The instant appeal has been preferred against the order dated 09.12.2022 passed in Misc. Cr. Application No.2258 of 2022 [NIA Case RC-01/2021/NIA/RNC Special (NIA) Case No.01 of 2021] arising out of Balumath P.S. Case No.234 of 2020 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVI-cum-Special Judge, NIA, Ranchi, by which, the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected.

¶15

2. The brief facts of the case as per the first information report based on the self-statement of Rana Bhanu Pratap Singh, Sub-Inspector of Police dated 19.12.2020 is that on 18.12.2020 at about 7:00 P.M. information was received at Balumath P.S. that some unknown persons were burning vehicles while firing indiscriminately near Checkpost No. 1 of Tetariyakhad Colliery. The assailants had fired at the Police party which had rushed to the spot. It has been alleged that from the place of occurrence burnt vehicles, fragments of cane bomb with wire, spent cartridges, hand written pamphlets issuing threats to the transporters and

¶16

¶17

coal companies involved in mining etc. were found at the spot. It has also been alleged that gangsters Sujit Sinha and Aman Sao had conspired with Pradeep Ganjhu and his associates namely, Santosh Ganjhu, Bihari Ganjhu, Sakendra Ganjhu, Pramod Ganjhu and others for extortion and disruption of government work. Based on the aforesaid allegations Balumath P.S. Case No. 234/2020 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 353, 504, 506, 307, 427, 435, 386, 387, 120-B, 121-A, 216 of the I.P.C., Section 25(1)(b), 26, 27, 35 of the Arms Act, Section 3/4 of the Explosive Substances Act, Section 17 of the CLA Act and Sections 10, 13, 16(1)(b), 20 and 23 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. The Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, vide order F. No. 11011/01/2020/NIA dated 07.01.2020, in terms of sub-section (5) of Section 6 read with Section 8 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 had handed over the investigation of Balumath P.S. Case No. 234/2020 to the National Investigation Agency, consequent to which, the First Information Report was re-registered as NIA Case No. RC-01/2021/NIA/RNC under Sections 147, 148, 149, 353, 504, 506, 307, 427, 435, 386, 387, 120B, 121A, 216 of the I.P.C., Sections 25(1)(b), 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act, Sections 3/4 of the explosive Substances Act, Section 17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act and Sections 10, 13, 16(1)(b), 20 and 23 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (hereinafter referred to as UAP Act for the sake of brevity). On completion of investigation charge-sheet was submitted by the NIA against the appellant and others. 3. It has been submitted on behalf of the appellant that no specific overt act has been alleged and the co-accused, namely, Jasim Ansari and Wasim Ansari, on similar and identical allegation, have also been granted

¶18

¶19

bail on 03.01.2023 by the coordinate Division Bench of this Court by filing an appeal being Cr. Appeal (DB) No.435 of 2022 and the coordinate Division Bench of this Court after taking into consideration the statutory mandate as contained under Section 43-D(5) of the U.A.P. Act, has come to the conclusion about prima-facie case for release of the appellant on bail and thereby, the order rejecting the bail dated 28.03.2022 passed by learned AJC-XVI-cum-Special Judge, NIA, Ranchi in Misc. Cr. Application No. 46/2022, has been quashed and set aside and in consequence thereof, the co-accused, namely, Jasim Ansari and Wasim Ansari have been directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned AJC-XVI-cum-Special Judge, NIA, Ranchi in connection with Misc. Cr. Application No. 46/2022, arising out of Special (NIA) Case No. 01/2021 (R.C. No. 01/2021/NIA/RNC) initially registered as Balumath P.S. Case No. 234/2020.

¶20

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the case of the appellant of this appeal is also identical to that of case of Jasim Ansari and Wasim Ansari and as such, since, the coordinate Bench of this Court has also considered the issue on merit with respect to the case of the coaccused, namely, Jasim Ansari and Wasim Ansari and as such, the order by which, the prayer for bail has been rejected by the learned AJC-XVIcum-Special Judge, NIA, Ranchi, which is impugned in this appeal dated 09.12.2022, may also be quashed and set aside with a direction to release of the appellant from judicial custody .

¶21

5. The respondent NIA has appeared and represented by Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel for the NIA.

¶22

The counter affidavit has been filed on their behalf and the fact

¶23

¶24

about allegation said to be identical as per the argument advanced on behalf of the appellant with the case of co-accused, namely, Jasim Ansari and Wasim Ansari but there is no denial to that fact in the affidavit filed on oath.

¶25

6. This Court after taking into consideration the fact and also keeping the mandate of Section 43-D(5) of the U.A.P. Act, is of the view that the appellant has been able to make out a prima-facie case as per the requirement as mandated under Section 43-D(5) of the U.A.P. Act and considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, i.e., on the identical fact, the coordinate Division Bench of this Court has also interfered with the order rejecting the bail by the learned AJC-XVI-cum-Special Judge, NIA, Ranchi against the Jasim Ansari and Wasim Ansari, hence, the order dated 09.12.2022 passed by the learned AJC-XVI-cum-Special Judge, NIA, Ranchi in Misc. Cr. Application No.2258 of 2022 requires interference.

¶26

7. Accordingly, the order dated 09.12.2022 passed in Misc. Cr. Application No.2258 of 2022 [NIA Case RC-01/2021/NIA/RNC Special (NIA) Case No.01 of 2021] arising out of Balumath P.S. Case No.234 of 2020 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVI-cumSpecial Judge, NIA, Ranchi, is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶27

8. In view thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed.

¶28

9. In consequence thereof, the appellant, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVI-cum-Special Judge, NIA, Ranchi in connection with Misc. Cr. Application No.2258 of 2022 [NIA Case RC-01/2021/NIA/RNC Special (NIA) Case No.01 of 2021] arising out

¶29

¶30

of Balumath P.S. Case No.234 of 2020.

¶31

10. Needless to say that the appellant will cooperate with the trial.

¶32

11. Accordingly, the instant appeal stands disposed of.

¶33

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶34

(Subhash Chand, J.)

¶35

Rohit/-N.A.F.R.

Majibul Ansari v. the National Investigating Agency New Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Majibul Ansari v. the National Investigating Agency New Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary Primary Education and Ors. Vs Vivekanand Tiwari and Ors.

Tulsi Mahto Vs Bhagwati Devi

The State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary Primary Education H R D and Ors. Vs Binpin Bihari Pathak and Ors.

Ashraf Ali Khan Vs State of Jharkhand

Sabitri Karmkar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ashish Kumar Sah Alias Ashish Kumar Shah Vs the State of Jharkhand