The Special Court under NIA Act rejects bail applications of four accused relying on letters mentioning about ending Modi-raj in the country.
The applicant/accused No.12 who has been arrested on the accusation for commission of offences punishable under Sections 121, 121A, 124A, 153A, 505(1)(b), 115, 120B, 201 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1872 and Sections 13, 16, 17, 18, 18A, 18B, 20, 38 and 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, has filed present application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973.
Advocate Gaikawad, appearing for the appellant, contended that the applicant has not been named in the report and that his house was searched on 10.09.2019, but he was arrested on 28.07.2020, after he was summoned.
He argued that even if the allegations made against the applicant are taken into consideration, in that case only an offence punishable under Sections 38 and 39 of the UAP Act can be said to have been made out. Therefore, he has prayed to exercise discretion in favour of the applicant and release him on bail.
S.P.P. Shetty contended that there is sufficient material against the applicant and the co accused to show that they were involved in the activities of banned organization. He argued that the applicant and the co accused were not merely passive but active members of the banned organization.
SPP added that at the time of house search of the applicant incriminating material including laptop and the mobile handset of the applicant were seized.
The Special Judge, NIA City Civil and Sessions Court, Dinesh E. Kothalikar stated that Considering the fact that the applicant is involved in an offence punishable under the provision of UAP Act, for deciding the bail application, the provision incorporated under Section 43D sub section (5) of the UAPA is required to be taken into account.
The court noted that the fact that the pamphlet as stated earlier contains the mobile connection number of the applicant being the person, who was to be contacted for such activities and the name of the applicant also appears in the aforesaid letter, give corroboration to each other and prima facie sufficient to show the involvement of the applicant in furthering activities of the CPI (M).
The court said that the contents of the letter prima facie speaks that the CPI (M) was bent upon to end the ModiRaj i.e. the Modi led Government. Not only this, they were also thinking to go for another incident like the death of Mr. Rajiv Gandhi, by targeting the road shows of Mr. Modi.
Upon consideration of all the circumstances as well as law on the subject, the court concluded that the applicant has failed to make out a case for grant of bail.
Case title: Hany Banu v/s The State of Maharashtra, The State of Maharashtra v/s Sagar Tatyarama Gorkhe and Ors.
Citation: SPECIAL CASE NO. 414 OF 2020,