While considering the grant of bail under Section 43
(5) D, 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
made out against the accused or not. We have gone
through the material on record and are satisfied that the
Appellant is entitled for bail and that the Special Court
and High Court erred in not granting bail to the Appellant
for the following reasons:
(A) A close scrutiny of the material placed before the
Court would clearly shows that the main
accusation against the Appellant is that he paid
levy / extortion amount to the terrorist
organization. Payment of extortion money does
not amount to terror funding. It is clear from the
supplementary charge-sheet and the other
material on record that other accused who are
members of the terrorist organization have been
systematically collecting extortion amounts from
businessmen in Amrapali and Magadh areas. The
Appellant is carrying on transport business in the
area of operation of the organization. It is
alleged in the second supplementary chargesheet
that the Appellant paid money to the
members of the TPC for smooth running of his
business. Prima facie, it cannot be said that the
Appellant conspired with the other members of
the TPC and raised funds to promote the
organization.
(B) Another factor taken into account by the Special
Court and the High Court relates to the allegation
of the Appellant meeting the members of the
terror organization. It has been held by the High
Court that the Appellant has been in constant
touch with the other accused. The Appellant has
revealed in his statement recorded under Section
164 Cr.PC 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was withdrawn from the bank to pay salaries to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 activity. There is no
allegation that Appellant was receiving any
money. On the other hand, the Appellant is
accused of providing money to the members of
TPC. {Para 11}
12. After a detailed examination of the contentions of
the parties and scrutiny of the material on record, we are
not satisfied that a prima facie case has been made out
against the Appellant relating to the offences alleged
against him. We make it clear that these findings are
restricted only for the purpose of grant of bail to the
Appellant and the trial court shall not be influenced by
these observations during trial.
Non-Reportable
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Criminal Appeal Nos . 314-315 of 2021
Sudesh Kedia Vs Union of India
Author: L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.
Dated: April 09, 2021.
Read full Judgment here: Click here
Print Page
No comments:
Post a Comment