Jharkhand High Court
Prince Raj Shrivastav vs The State Of Jharkhand on 4 August, 2022
Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
1 W.P.(Cr.) No. 58 of 2022
With
W.P.(Cr.) No. 69 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
----
W.P.(Cr.) No. 58 of 2022
----
Prince Raj Shrivastav, aged about 26 years, s/o Satish Shrivastav, r/o Ground Floor, Kaushalya Villa, Kilburn Colony, Hinoo, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi ..... Petitioner
-- Versus --
1.The State of Jharkhand, through Superintendent of Police, Anti Terrorist Squad, officiating its office from Sector 3, Birsa Nagar, P.O. GPO and P.S. Jagarnathpur Thana, District Ranchi
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Anti Terrorist Squad, officiating its office from Sector 3, Birsa Nagar, P.O. GPO and P.S. Jagarnathpur Thana, District Ranchi
3.Luv Kumar Singh, s/o late Santu Singh, aged about 35 years, posted as Police Inspector at ATS Ranchi, officiating its office from Sector 3, Birsa Nagar, P.O. GPO and P.S. Jagarnathpur Thana, District Ranchi ...... Respondents With W.P.(Cr.) No. 69 of 2022
----
Manjari Srivastava, aged about 32 years, wife of Chandra Prakash Ranu, resident of 2A002, Akme Encore Apartment P.O.-Brookfield, P.S.-HAL Police Station, District-Bengaluru, State -Karnataka ..... Petitioner
-- Versus --
1.The State of Jharkhand
2.Director General of Police, Jharkhand Police, Police Headquarters, P.O., P.S.Dhurwa, District Ranchi
3.Superintendent of Police, Anti Terrorist Squad, Police Headquarters, P.O., P.S. Dhurwa, District -Ranchi ...... Respondents
----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
---
For the Petitioners :- Mr. Jitendra S. Singh, Advocate [W.P.(Cr.) No.69 of 2022] Mr. Rajendra Krishna, Advocate [W.P.(Cr.) No.58 of 2022] For the State :- Mr. Ashutosh Anand, A.A.G.III [W.P.(Cr.) No.69 of 2022] Mr. P.A.S. Pati, SC-IV [W.P.(Cr.) No.58 of 2022]
----
5/04.08.2022 Heard Mr. Rajendra Krishna, the learned counsel and Mr. Jitendra S. Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 2 W.P.(Cr.) No. 58 of 2022 With W.P.(Cr.) No. 69 of 2022 petitioners in W.P.(Cr.) No.58 of 2022 and W.P.(Cr.) No.69 of 2022, respectively and Mr. P.A.S. Pati, the learned SC-IV and Mr. Ashutosh Anand, the learned A.A.G.III appearing on behalf of the respondent State in W.P.(Cr.) No.58 of 2022 and W.P.(Cr.) No.69 of 2022, respectively.
An I.A. being I.A. No.5198 of 2022 in W.P.(Cr.) No.69 of 2022 has been filed for amendment in the prayer portion.
By way of the said I.A. petition it has been prayed that amendment may kindly be allowed in the petition for quashing the F.I.R alongwith the entire criminal proceeding, arising out of ATS Ranchi P.S.Case No.1/2022 dated 17.01.2022, pending in the court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVIII-cum- Special Judge, ATS, Ranchi.
Mr. Jitendra S.Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that initially rejection of the anticipatory bail has been challenged in this petition and subsequently this I.A. application has been filed.
Mr. Ashutosh Anand, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State opposed the prayer made in the I.A submitting that this is after-thought of the petitioner.
In view of the above facts and submissions of the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as the respondent State, to avoid multiplicity of the litigation, the prayer made in the I.A is allowed.
I.A. No.5198 of 2022 in W.P.(Cr.) No.69 of 2022 3 W.P.(Cr.) No. 58 of 2022 With W.P.(Cr.) No. 69 of 2022 stands disposed of.
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner shall make out necessary correction in the petition in course of the day.
In both the petitions, the common question of facts and the F.I.R are under challenge and that is why both these petitions have been heard together with consent of the parties.
Both these petitions have been filed for quashing of the F.I.R. being ATS Ranchi P.S.Case No.1/2022 registered on 17.01.2022, under sections 386, 387, 109, 34, 120(B), 201 I.P.C read with sections 20 and 21 of Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967, pending in the court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVIII-cum-Special Judge, ATS, Ranchi.
The F.I.R was registered on 17.01.2022 alleging therein that:
That the prosecution case has been initiated on the basis of written statement of Sri Luv Kumar Singh, Inspector-cum- Station In-charge, A.T.S., Ranchi, made on 17.01.2020 at around 10.30 hours stating that he is making self-statement that on 15.01.2022 at 10.45 hours, the Superintendent of Police, ATS received secret information regarding absconding notorious criminal Aman Srivastava that he received ransom money by threatening different industrialists, coal businessmen by inducing criminal force, threat of arson and murder.
It is further alleged that Aman Srivastava with the aid of 10 other named accused persons, including the petitioners, namely (1) Abheek Srivastava (brother), (2) Manjari Srivastava 4 W.P.(Cr.) No. 58 of 2022 With W.P.(Cr.) No. 69 of 2022 (sister), (3) brother-in-law Chandrapakash Ranu, (4) Siddharth Sahu, (5) Asley Lakra, (6) Prince Raj and other associates namely (7) Vinod Pandey, (8) Amjad Khan, (9) Jaheer Ansari, (10) Mahmood @ Nepali,
(ii) Aslam, (12) Firoj Khan and others, are extorting receiving ransom money and received the same through Hawala.
It has been further alleged that huge amount of ransom amount is lying in the custody of Siddharth Sahu, which was to be transferred to Aman Srivastava and Avik Srivastava by way of Hawala and they are yet to receive more ransom money.
It has been further alleged that on the occasion of non-payment of extortion, they are conspiring to commit criminal offence. It has also been alleged that these people make conversation through different channels of media i.e. Whatsapp, Telegram and LineApp. It has further been alleged that there is so much of terror prevailing that no one dares to lodge any complaint before the police. The Superintendent of Police informed the informant that if hide outs of Aman Srivastava gang is raided, many incriminating articles can be recovered. The said information was registered as Sanha 10/2022 dated 15.01.2022 and accordingly, police party was prepared with 12 named police personnel's and other police associates. Thereafter, the police party accordingly raided the place of Zahir Khan, Amzad Khan, Binod Kumar Pandey, Mahmud alias Nepali, Ashley Lakra, Siddharth Sahu, Aslam, Prince Raj, Azaz and also raided the places of Aman Srivastava and Avik Srivastava situated at Bangaluru. During the said investigation and verification, from the house of Prince Raj, one revolver and 6 bullets were seized from the possession of one Sanjay Karmakar who 5 W.P.(Cr.) No. 58 of 2022 With W.P.(Cr.) No. 69 of 2022 introduced himself as bodyguard of Prince Raj. Upon demand of arms license, Sanjay Karmakar presented arms license issued from State of Jammu & Kashmir, and accordingly FIR bearing Doranda P.S.Case no.12/2022 dated 17.1.2022 u/s 25(1-B)a/30 of Arms Act was registered against him.
It has further been alleged that during investigation and verification, on 16.01.2022 at 23.40 hours, cash amount of Rs.28 lakhs 88 thousands were recovered and seized from the residence of Siddharth Sahu in presence of two independent witnesses. Upon interrogation, Siddharth Sahu confessed the seized amount is extortion money for Aman Srivastava which was to be sent to Aman via different sources through Hawala. Siddharth Sahu further states that notorious criminal Late Sushil Srivastava is his Mausa and after the murder of Sushil Srivastava, the gang is being run by Aman Srivastava along with his brother Avik Srivastava, sister manjari Srivastava and brother in law Chandra Prakash Ranu. Because of terror of the name of father of Aman Srivastava, rangdari is being collected from entire Jharkhand. The ransom money collected is being invested in different business. In criminal activities of Aman Srivastava besides his own brother and sister, other associates involved are 1. Ashley Lakra, 2. Prince Raj, 3. Vinod Pandey, 4. Amjad Khan,
5. Zaheer Ansari, 6. Mahmood alias Nepali, 7. Aslam, 8. Firoz Khan.
Further, it has been alleged that on 16.01.2022 at 22.50 hours, during investigation and verification, a total amount of Rs.5 Lakhs 42 thousands were seized from the residence of Vinod Kumar Pandey who confessed that he is an active member of Aman Srivastava gang. It has been further 6 W.P.(Cr.) No. 58 of 2022 With W.P.(Cr.) No. 69 of 2022 confessed that the seized amount is extortion money was supposed to be sent to Aman Srivastava and Avik Srivastava through Hawala transactions.
The accused persons namely 1. Aman Srivastava
2. Avik Srivastava, 3. Manjari Srivastava, 4. Ashely Lakra, 5. Prince Raj and other associates namely 6. Vinod Kumar Pandey, 7. Amjad Khan, 8. Zaheer Ansari, 9. Mahmood alias Nepali, 10. Aslam,
11. Firoz Khan, 12. Siddharth Sahu, 13. Chandra Prakash Ranu,
14. Pintu & 15. Sunil have committed cognizable offences under section 386/387/109/34/201 & 120B of IPC and hence they have been made accused under the aforesaid sections.
Mr. Jitendra S. Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf the petitioner in W.P.(Cr.) No.69 of 2022 submits that only to deprive the petitioner of anticipatory bail in light of section 43D(4) of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has been applied against the petitioner. By way of referring sections 20 and 21 of the said Act, he submits that it is for the terrorist gang or organization and if the proceeds arising out of terrorism then only sections 20 and 21 of the said Act are attracted. To elaborate his argument, Mr. Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner further refers to section 15 of the Act and submits that none of the provisions/averments prescribed under section 15 of the said Act is fulfilled and that is why the imposition of the said section is made arbitrarily. He further submits that the charge sheet has not been submitted as yet. On these grounds, he submits that at least the 7 W.P.(Cr.) No. 58 of 2022 With W.P.(Cr.) No. 69 of 2022 U.A.P Act is not involved so far as the petitioner is concerned.
Mr. Rajendra Krishna, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in W.P.(Cr.) No.58 of 2022 adopted the argument of Mr. Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in W.P.(Cr.) No.69 of 2022 and by way of referring the F.I.R, he submits that how the petitioner is involved in the said crime is not made out and that is why the implication of the petitioner under the said Act is unwarranted. On this ground, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this Court may quash the F.I.R and the entire criminal proceeding.
Per contra, Mr. Ashutosh Anand, the learned A.A.G.-III appearing on behalf of the respondent State in W.P.(Cr.) No.69 of 2022 submits that by way of the amendment in the Act, the amendment has taken place in section 15 of the Act in the year 2013 and the word 'economic security' has been inserted in section 15 of the said Act. He submits that in the entire F.I.R it has come how the money in question have been transferred through Hawala and in view of economic security rightly the case has been instituted under the U.A.P. Act. He further submits that the investigation is going on and the charge sheet has not been submitted as yet and this Court sitting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, at this stage, may not interfere with the F.I.R. He submits that the counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent State wherein the facts have been disclosed which has come in the investigation till date. By way of referring paragraph no.9 of the counter affidavit, he submits that the 8 W.P.(Cr.) No. 58 of 2022 With W.P.(Cr.) No. 69 of 2022 accused Sidharth Sahu has disclosed that the petitioner and the accused Aveek Srivastava used to send cash to him through Pintu and the same were transferred to accused Aman Srivastava through Hawala and other illegal channels. The mobile used for the Hawala transaction has been found to be of this petitioner which has come in the investigation. The call detail of the petitioner also proved the fact of involvement to transfer money through Hawala Channels. The two vehicles in the name of Aman Srivastava and Mahboob Alam who are the main accused have been found parked in the house of this petitioner. He further submits that telegram, whatsapp for transferring ransom money has been sent to Centre for Development of Advance Computing (CDAC), Kolkata for technical assessment which is awaited. By way of referring paragraph no.24 of the said counter affidavit, he submits that the petitioner is having 15 bank accounts between the year 2012 to 2015. He submits that she is the sister of Aman Srivastava. He submits that elaborate counter affidavit has been filed wherein till date investigation has been brought to the knowledge of this Court that is giving details of transfer of money.
Mr. Pati, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State in W.P.(Cr.) No. 58 of 2022 on the law point adopted the argument of Mr. Ashutosh Anand, the learned A.A.G-III appearing on behalf of the respondent State in W.P.(Cr.) No.69 of 2022. He further submits that the counter affidavit has been filed in this case wherein at paragraph no.13 what has been found in the investigation has been disclosed. He submits that one Aveek 9 W.P.(Cr.) No. 58 of 2022 With W.P.(Cr.) No. 69 of 2022 Srivastava has been arrested in connection with the present case had confessed that through the Hawala Networks, the petitioner used to invest the ransom amount collected by the terror gang in his shell companies situated at Ranchi and Banglore such as Ekta Contact and Sky Bricks. Another co-accused namely Binod Kumar Pandey has been arrested in connection with the instant First Information report and had confessed that the petitioner used to collect ransom by showing the fear of the Aveek Srivastava and Aman Srivastava. One Chandra Prakash Ranu and Sandeep Prasad have also confessed that the ransom money collected by the terror gang was invested in the shell companies (Ekta Contact & Ekta Avalon) formed by this petitioner who happened to be cousin brother of Aman Srivastava. He further submits that call detail record of the petitioner reveals of transfer of ransom amount through Hawala network. It has been disclosed in the counter affidavit that the petitioner's involvement in Hawala transaction has been sent to Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (CDAC), Kolkata for technical assessment. He submits that the detail of how the 8 kathas of land from the proceeds of ransom money has been purchased by the relatives of the petitioner is disclosed in paragraph no.22 of the counter affidavit. In paragraph no.26 of the counter affidavit, the shell company account in UCO bank has been disclosed. He submits that an amount of Rs.2 crores approximately have been transferred in the 4 bank accounts of the petitioner. Relying on these, he submits that there are direct allegation against the petitioner and moreover, the charge sheet 10 W.P.(Cr.) No. 58 of 2022 With W.P.(Cr.) No. 69 of 2022 has not been submitted as yet. Only the F.I.R is under challenge in this petition.
He submits that as per paragraph no.23 of the counter affidavit several incriminating documents were seized during the search of the house of the petitioner which includes several documents relating to the accused Aman Srivastava and his property.
In view of the above submission of the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties, the Court has perused the materials on record and finds that in the F.I.R the name of both the petitioners have appeared in several places which is quoted (supra). The petitioners are cousin brother and sister of one Aman Srivastava who is the main accused of the crime. In the F.I.R it has been disclosed how the money has been transferred through Hawala and both the petitioners' name have been disclosed in transaction of those money. Thus, there are allegations against the petitioners.
The argument of Mr. Jitendra S. Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in W.P.(Cr.) No.69 of 2022 so far as section 20 and 21 and section 43(D)(4) of the Act is concerned, it is not in dispute and section 43(D)(4) of the Act speaks of anticipatory bail will not lie in U.A.P. Act cases and sections 20 and 21 of the Act is with regard to the terror gang, however, looking into the amendment of 2013 in section 15 of the Act, it transpires that economic security is inserted in that section and looking into the entire F.I.R., it transpires that huge amount 11 W.P.(Cr.) No. 58 of 2022 With W.P.(Cr.) No. 69 of 2022 has been transferred through Hawala by the members of the gang including these petitioners. Thus, the argument of Mr. Singh, the learned counsel with regard to section 43(D)(4) and sections 20 and 21 of the Act is negated by the Court. Economic offence is a very harsh crime of the society. An economic offence is committed with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit regardless of the consequence to the community. A disregard for the interest of the community can be manifested only at the cost of forfeiting the trust and faith of the community in the system to administer justice in an even-handed manner without fear of criticism from the quarters which view white collar crimes with a permissive eye unmindful of the damage done to the national economy and national interest. Moreover, only the F.I.R is under challenge in these petitions and the investigation is still going on. There are parameters of quashing the F.I.R. These cases are not coming under any of the category in paragraph no. 102 as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal", reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335.
No relief can be extended to the petitioners, and accordingly, W.P.(Cr.) No.58 of 2022 and W.P.(Cr.) No.69 of 2022 stand dismissed.
I.A. if any also stands disposed of.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) SI/,