Mere association with a terrorist organization not sufficient to attract section 38 offence

Shailendra Bhadouriya Vs State of Chhattisgarh (Chhattisgarh High Court)

Facts- As per case of the prosecution, on 24.3.2020 on the basis of secret information, the respondent searched a vehicle bearing registration No.CG 07 AH 6555 driven by Tapas Kumar Palit. In that search, 95 pairs of shoes, green black printed cloths for uniform, 2 bundles of electric wires each of 100 meter, LED lens, walki talki and other articles were found in his possession (Tapas Kumar Palit). Seizure was made accordingly. It is further case of the prosecution that these articles were to be supplied by Tapas Kumar Palit to naxalites in order to support their illegal and disruptive activities. It is further case of the prosecution that said Tapas Kumar Palit was working with Rudransh Earth Movers Road Construction Company, a partnership firm of appellant No.2­Komal Verma and one co­accused Ajay Jain. It is further case of the prosecution that Tapas Kumar Palit provided information that articles were being provided on the instructions/consent of Ajay Jain and Komal Verma, who were given consent/permission to do so by Varun Jain, Director of M/s Landmark Royal Engineering (India) Private Limited. It is also the case of the prosecution that the accused were providing funds as well to naxalites though no cash was recovered on the said date, but the police arrested all of them including appellant No.1­Shailendra Bhadouriya on 4.5.2020 and appellant No.2­Komal Verma on 23.4.2020. It is also case of the prosecution that appellant No.2­Komal Verma is partner of Rudransh Earth Movers Road Construction Company and appellant No.1­Shailendra Bhadouriya was working as supervisor in that firm. The appellants herein have filed an application under Section 439 of the CrPC for grant of bail before the Special Court under NIA Act, which has been rejected by the Special Judge (NIA) Act, Kanker by the impugned order, against which, this criminal appeal has been filed.

Conclusion- Honorable Supreme Court in the matter of Thwaha Fasal has held that mere association with a terrorist organisation as a member or otherwise will not be sufficient to attract the offence under Section 38 unless the association is with intention to further its activities.

Considering the role of appellant No.1­Shailendra Bhadouriya who was supervisor of Rudransh Earth Movers Road Construction Company and appellant No.2­Komal Verma, who is partner of co­accused Ajay Jain, who has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Appeal No.328 of 2022 on 4.5.2022 and also considering the fact that trial is likely to take time and considering the nature of evidence available on record with regard to meeting of the appellants with terrorist/banned organization and no objectionable material/cash was recovered from possession of the appellants and appellant No.1 is in custody since 4.5.2022 and appellant No.2 is in custody since 23.4.2022 i.e. for more than two years and there case being similar to that of Ajay Jain, we are inclined to set­aside the impugned order.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.