CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs. ACHARYA TADBHAVANANANDA AVADHUTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revisional application has been preferred by the petitioner challenging the order dated 19.4.04 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 9th Court, Calcutta in G.R. Case No. 696 of 1996 thereby rejecting prayer of the prosecution for police custody of accused opposite party Acharya Tadbhavanananda Avadhuta @ Tusar Kanti @ Lalchand Parihar.

(2.) Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that on the basis of source information on 18.12.95 that huge quantities of arms and ammunitions in village Khatanga, Belamu, Maramu, Beradi and Barudi within P.S. Jhaldah were in existence, the Officer-in-Charge of Jhaldah P.S. registered the matter in G. D. Entry No. 515 and left for situs. On search huge amount of arms and ammunitions were recovered and he registered Jhaldah P.S. Case No. 152 dated 18.12.95 under sections 121, 121A, 122 and 123 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter called the IPC) and sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act against unknown persons. By a notification issued by the Government of West Bengal the said case was transferred to the petitioner for investigation and it was registered as No. R. C. 11/S/95 Cal dated 28.12.95 by Delhi Special Police Establishment, Anti-Corruption Branch, Kolkata. After completing investigation chargesheet was submitted on 20.3.96 and after further investigation supplementary chargesheet was submitted against 14 persons on 5.9.96. The accused opposite party is the General Secretary of the Prout Universal, an organisation of Anandamarg. The Members of the Prout Universal and Members of Anandmarg, conspired to wage and war against the Government of India and in that process they procured the said arms and ammunition and planned it to drop near Anandmarg Campus in the District of Purulia. The chargesheet was submitted showing this accused opposite party as one of the absconders.

(3.) He contended that with the arrest of the accused opposite party an avenue has been opened to the prosecution for interrogating him to detect some more in the process of further investigation. Further investigation is required concerning: