TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (4) TMI 1318
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd Section 17(1)(2) of the Criminal Law Amendment (CLA) Act. The application filed for grant of bail was dismissed by the Judicial Commissioner-cum-Special Judge NIA at Ranchi on 14.02.2020. The High Court dismissed the criminal appeal filed by the Appellant and upheld the order dated 14.02.2020 of the Special Judge. Therefore, the present appeal. 2. On a complaint made by Shri Ramadhari Singh, Sub-Inspector, Police Station Simariya, FIR No. 02/2016 was registered on 11.01.2016 at Police Station Tandwa Under Sections 414, 384, 386, 387, 120B Indian Penal Code, Sections 25(1B)(a)/ 26/35 of the Arms Act and Section 17(1)(2) of the CLA Act against Vinod Kumar and others. The allegation against the persons named in the FIR is that they were op....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ctors, traders, transporters etc. was given. It was mentioned in the supplementary charge-sheet that coal traders/transporters were paying cash to Shanti Sah Sanchalan Samiti, Central Coalfield Limited, village committees and TPC operatives for carrying on their business smoothly. 5. On further investigation, a second supplementary charge-sheet was filed on 10.01.2020 in which the Appellant was shown as A-19. According to the supplementary charge-sheet the Appellant is engaged in transporting of coal on behalf of GVK Power and Godavari Commodities. He had attended meetings with TPC leaders and had paid levy to TPC leader Akraman (A-14) CCL employees and village committee members from his current account. In view of the payments made by him....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... v. Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali (2019) 5 SCC 1, the High Court concluded that the accusations against the Appellant are prima facie made out disentitling the Appellant for grant of bail. 7. We have heard C.A. Sundaram, learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant and Mr. Sairica Raju, learned Additional Solicitor General for the Respondent. It was submitted by the Appellant that the only accusation is payment of illegal levy to TPC for the smooth functioning of the business. The Appellant is not a member of TPC and cannot be Accused of terror funding. On the other hand, there was no way he could carry on smooth transportation of coal without meeting the demand of the terrorist organization. The meeting that the Appellant had with the members of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the other members of the organization to strengthen and promote the activities of the organization. Further, an amount of Rs. 9,95,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakh and Ninety-Five Thousand only) was seized from the Appellant's house, making him liable for punishable Under Section 21 of the Act. 10. In National Investigation Agency v. Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali (supra), this Court considered the parameters for exercise of the power Under Section 43-D(5), held as follows: 23. By virtue of the proviso to Sub-section (5), it is the duty of the Court to be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against the Accused is prima facie true or otherwise. Our attention was invited to the decisions of this Court, which....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... opine that the accusation is "prima facie true", as compared to the opinion of the Accused "not guilty" of such offence as required under the other special enactments. In any case, the degree of satisfaction to be recorded by the Court for opining that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against the Accused is prima facie true, is lighter than the degree of satisfaction to be recorded for considering a discharge application or framing of charges in relation to offences under the 1967 Act.... 11. While considering the grant of bail Under Section 43D(5), it is the bounden duty of the Court to apply its mind to examine the entire material on record for the purpose of satisfying itself, whether a prima facie case is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....minal Procedure that he was summoned to meet A-14 and the other members of the organization in connection with the payments made by him. Prima facie, we are not satisfied that a case of conspiracy has been made out at this stage only on the ground that the Appellant met the members of the organization. (C) An amount of Rs. 9,95,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakh and Ninety-Five Thousand only) was seized from the house of the Appellant which was accounted for by the Appellant who stated that the amount was withdrawn from the bank to pay salaries to his employees and other expenses. We do not agree with the prosecution that the amount is terror fund. At this stage, it cannot be said that the amount seized from the Appellant is proceeds from terrorist ....