LAWS(P&H)-2023-9-50

CHANDEEP SINGH Vs. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY

Decided On September 06, 2023
Chandeep Singh Appellant
V/S
NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal, filed under Sec. 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (for short, the '2008 Act'), is directed against the order dtd. 12/1/2023 whereby the bail application was dismissed by the Special Judge, NIA Court, SAS Nagar Mohali, Punjab in RC No.20/2019/NIA/DLI dtd. 23/9/2019 arising out of FIR No.280 dtd. 5/9/2019. The said FIR had been lodged under Ss. 304, 153-A and 120-B IPC and Ss. 13, 18, 18A, 18B, 20, 23 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (for short, the 'UAPA Act') and Ss. 3, 4 and 5 of Explosive Substance Act, 1908, initially lodged at Police Station Sadar, Tarn Taran. The FIR thereafter was lodged by the NIA on 23/9/2019 on the information being received by the Central Government on account of the gravity of the offence and the national and international linkages which were required to be looked into by the NIA.

(2.) The applicant-Chandeep Singh @ Gabbar Singh (A-4), though not named in the FIR, had been arrested at a later stage of the investigation in the case of 15/9/2019 by the Punjab Police due to his associated role and accordingly, has been held not entitled for concession of bail by the learned Special Judge. The reasoning which weighed with the learned Special Judge to dismiss the bail application was on the ground that on an earlier occasion, the bail of the applicant had been dismissed on 8/6/2020 and an appeal preferred before this Court bearing CRA-D-339-2020 had been dismissed on 11/12/2020 (Annexure A-6). The reason given was that there was no change of circumstances for filing his application for the second time. The bail application was rejected though it had been pointed out that in the intervening period on 14/1/2022 (Annexure A-4) bail had been granted to the co-accused, Amarjeet Singh @ Amar Singh (A-8).

(3.) The Trial Court came to the conclusion that this Court while granting bail to Amarjeet Singh, exercised its powers being a Constitutional Court and therefore, the present applicant was not entitled for the benefit of bail, in view of the dismissal of his appeal at an earlier point of time. Reliance was also placed upon the charge-sheet filed that the appellant had met with various other co-accused from the year 20132014 and had been initiated into radicalization by Bikramjit Singh @ Bikkar Panjwar @ Bikkar Baba (A-9) and regular meetings were taking place and there was an attendance in the religious events and he had become a member of the terrorist gang founded by co-accused for committing terrorist acts. After the bomb-blast had taken place on 4/9/2014 due to which FIR had been lodged, he had informed Amarjeet Singh about the incident and rushed to meet the co-accused, Harjit Singh (A-2) and Gurjant Singh (A-3) at the Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, Tarn Taran. Resultantly, it was held that he was inclined to Pro-Khalistani ideology and was sharing posts on myriad issues relating to Khalistan and Referendum 2020 and using the social media platform for spreading propaganda against Government of India. Since a charge had already been framed against him on 3/12/2020, finding a prima facie case against him under Ss. 120-B, 153-A of IPC, Ss. 13, 18, 20 and 23 of UAPA Act and Ss. 3, 4 and 5 of Explosives Substances Act, 1908 the Trial Court choose not to grant the benefit of bail. Observations were also made that he being a local resident could influence witnesses and may tamper with evidence and may flee from justice if released on bail. Keeping in view the rigors of Sec. 43(D)(5) of UAPA Act, the relief had been denied.