PEER ARSHID IQBAL @ ASHU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the First Bail Application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested on 23.08.2017 in connection with Crime No.2882017 registered at Police Station Civil Lines, District Bilaspur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 121A, 122, 123, 120B, 201, 34 of the I.P.C.

(2.) As per the prosecution case, certain heavy monetary transactions were traced in account of the coaccused and frequent withdrawal and deposits were spotted. Consequently, one of the coaccused when was apprehended and on enquiry, it was revealed that different money were rooted through in the bank account at the instance of one Rajjan Tiwari and others, who were apprehended by the ATS, M.P. Consequently, the investigation revealed that the said Rajjan Tiwari with other coaccused used to collect the different secret army information about the military camp and used to take photographs, which were handed over to the Pakistany agents and thereby top secret information of our nation were being passed on in lieu of money. During such investigation, it also revealed that Rajjan Tiwari met with one Vikram Namdeo and Rajkumar Namdeo and different Bank accounts were opened, who were in touch with the Pakistany Agent Daud and the money which were being received from the outside were deposited in different accounts by deducting the commission. The entire network was operating at different cities of India. It is alleged that the present applicant in furtherance of such used to export the goods were inflated in value and also the imported goods were inflated in value to raise the Indian currency and the goods were exchanged over self valuation in route to Pathankot to Kashmir and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (hereinafter referred to as 'POK'). The trucks were operating under Nazir and Co., which were managed by the present applicant. One Akram and Irfan of Pakistan used to inform the amount which was being sent by them, therefore, by projecting the business policy, the present applicant used to receive 1 to 1.5 Lakhs from each truck and in turn the money raised by such means were given to the terrorists and the stone pelters at Kashmir. It was further the case of the prosecution that the present applicant used to under value his goods which were being exchanged as against the goods which were received from the POK thereby inflated value of the goods were being encashed for distribution of money. So the applicant along with the other coaccused used to wage war against the nation under the garb of doing business. Thereby the offence has been committed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present is a case of human rights violation, since the applicant who was in business without any evidence has been inculpated. It is stated that according to the prosecution if the amount of 1 to 1.5 Lakhs was being raised from each truck, it would show that the entire money was being used as a payment of tax, commission of applicant and payment of toll tax and after deducting his remuneration nothing can remain in his hand. It is further submitted that in such case if the entire quantum of money if was distributed then it is highly improbable that the applicant will continue business. The counsel would further submit that the allegations leveled against the applicant is only on the basis of the statement of one of the coaccused, who is an illiterate and in the memorandum nothing incriminating facts have been recovered which would connect the applicant with the offence. It is further submitted that the document which has been filed along with the bail application would show that the entire monetary transaction has been placed to show that the applicant was very much in the business, for which he was legally entitled. It is therefore submitted that the applicant is a trader and all the money has been accounted. She would further submit that the chargesheet in this case has been filed and she would place reliance on the judgment of Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation 1 (2012) 1 SCC 40, and would submit that under the circumstances no purpose would be served to keep the applicant in jail, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.