Jharkhand High Court
Sahbaaj Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand ....Opposite ... on 8 January, 2024
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1040 of 2023
---------
Sahbaaj Ansari, aged about 23 years, son of Sarafat Momin, resident of village Talbariya, P.O. Patana, P.S. Ranga, District Sahibganj.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ....Opposite Party
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
----------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, A.P.P.
-----------
th
12/Dated: 08 January, 2024
1. The instant criminal appeal has been filed under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 against the order dated 01.06.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Rajmahal in Anticipatory Bail Petition No. 189 of 2023, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for pre- arrest bail in connection with Ranga P.S. Case No. 35 of 2023 registered under Section 3/4/5 of the Explosive Substance Act, has been rejected.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted by referring to the entire allegation as per the FIR that there is nothing incriminating against the appellant save and except the explosive substance said to be found from the auto rickshaw which was being driven by the appellant in the capacity of driver being owned by his brother, namely, Farid Ansari.
3. It has been contended that it is admitted case of the prosecution that the said explosive substance is of one Mahadeo Saha and as such he has also been arrayed as a named accused person.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the prayer for anticipatory bail of said Mahanand Saha @ Mahadev Saha has been rejected vide order dated 10.08.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 916 of 2023 but the case of the appellant is distinct to the case of the said Mahadev Saha since against the said Mahadev Saha direct allegation of keeping the explosive substance in the said auto rickshaw is there while the case as per the prosecution so far as the appellant is concerned is that he was driving the said auto rickshaw.
25. Further submission has been made that the appellant is having no criminal antecedent.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant based upon the aforesaid ground has submitted that the learned court while considering the prayer for pre-arrest bail ought to have taken into consideration these aspect of the matter but having not done so, therefore, the instant appeal.
7. While on the other hand, Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State of Jharkhand has vehemently opposed the prayer for pre-arrest bail by taking the ground that the appellant cannot be said to be innocent since it has come in the FIR and the case diary that when the said auto rickshaw was intercepted, he fled away from the place of occurrence.
8. The aforesaid conduct of the said appellant suggest that he was conscious of the fact of that material which was loaded in his auto is explosive substance.
9. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor based upon the aforesaid ground has submitted that in view of the matter, the case of the said Mahanand Saha @ Mahadev Saha cannot be said to be distinct from the case of the appellant.
10.We have heard the learned counsel for the parties, gone across the finding recorded by the learned trial court in the impugned order as also the case diary and the affidavit in objection which has been filed in terms of the order dated 01.09.2023.
11.As per the prosecution version, the allegation against the appellant is that he was found in carrying explosive substance from one auto rickshaw which was said to be owned by his brother, namely, Farid Ansari. Further, the prosecution case is that the said explosive substance was of one Mahadev Saha.
12.The said Mahanand Saha @ Mahadev Saha had also filed an appeal for grant of his pre-arrest bail but this Court vide order dated 10.08.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 916 of 2023 has rejected the same by taking into consideration the fact that the said Mahadeo Saha @ Mahadev Saha was directly attributed to carrying out the explosive substance which are owned by him. However, the allegation against the appellant is that he was said to 3 carrying the said explosive substance in the auto rickshaw after the same was loaded.
13.The emphasis of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor is with respect to the conduct of the appellant wherein it has been pointed out by referring to the allegation levelled in the FIR that he fled away from the place of occurrence when the aforesaid auto rickshaw was intercepted by the police.
14.But, this Court is of the prima facie view that the merely by fleeing away from the place of occurrence, it cannot be construed that the appellant was knowing about the explosive substance which was being carried in his auto rickshaw having been loaded by Mahadeo Saha @ Mahadev Saha.
15.Further, against the said Mahanand Saha @ Mahadev Saha, direct attributality of the said explosive substance is there since as per the FSL report, the same explosive substance has been found to be ammonium nitrate, which are per the allegation, is owned by him. While allegation against the appellant herein is that he was driving the auto rickshaw having there the explosives.
16.It has further come on the record that there is no criminal antecedent against the appellant.
17.This Court, considering the aforesaid fact, is of the view that the case of Mahanand Saha @ Mahadev Saha is distinct to that of the case of the appellant as per the allegation levelled in the FIR and the material collected in course of investigation till date and the appellant is also having no criminal antecedent.
18.Accordingly, the order dated 01.06.2023 passed in Anticipatory Bail Petition No. 189 of 2023 in connection with Ranga P.S. Case No. 35 of 2023, according to our considered view, requires interference.
19.In consequence thereof, the order dated 01.06.2023 passed in Anticipatory Bail Petition No. 189 of 2023 is hereby quashed and set aside.
20.In view thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed.
21.On consideration of the aforesaid facts, this Court is inclined to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the appellant. The appellant, named above, 4 accordingly, is directed to surrender before the learned court below within 10 days and on his surrender, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajmahal in connection with Ranga P.S. Case No. 35 of 2023, subject to the condition as follows:
(i) that the appellant shall co-operate in the investigation and shall appear before the investigation agency and the learned trial court, as and when required;
(ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or tamper with the evidence;
(iii) that the petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court;
(iv) that the petitioner shall not leave India during the pendency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court;
(v) that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the petitioners;
22.In view thereof, the instant appeal stands disposed of.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Saurabh/-