SANTOSH CONSTRUCTION Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred under Sec. 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 against the order dtd. 6/1/2023 passed in Criminal Appeal No.90 of 2022 arising out of Special (NIA) Case No.02 of 2020 corresponding to R.C. No.25/2020/NIA/DLI (Chandwa P.S. Case No.158 of 2019) by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVI-cum-Special Judge, NIA, Ranchi whereby and whereunder the learned court below has been pleased to dismiss the appeal and confirmed the order dtd. 23/6/2022, passed by the designated authority by which the designated authority has confirmed the order of seizure of cash.

(2.) The prosecution story in brief as per the allegation made in the F.I.R. being Chandwa P.S. Case No.158 of 2019 is that on 22/11/2019, at approx. 20:00 hours, a patrolling police party of Chandwa Police Station consisting of ASI, Sukra Oraon, Home Guard/662, Sakindra Singh, Home Guard/499, Shambhu Prasad, Home Guard/Dvr., Yamuna Prasad and Home Guard/10476, Dinesh Ram in patrolling PCR Government Vehicle, TATA Safari bearing Registration No. JH-19B-0716, stopped at Lukuiya Mode at Chandwa. The cadres of banned terrorist organization i.e., CPI (Maoist) who were waiting in advance, fired indiscriminately at the Police Patrolling Party and killed 4 Police Personnel. Later, they looted the Government issued Arms and Ammunition i.e. one (1) Pistol, ten (10) rounds of 9mm Ammunition, three .303 Rifles, with 150 Rounds, from the martyred Police Personnel, shouted slogans of "Maowadi Zindabad" and escaped from the place of incident. Later, one of the Home Guards namely Dinesh Ram, who had escaped un- hurt, went to Chandwa P.S. and lodged a complaint against 18 named accused persons and some unknown persons. The case was registered and numbered as Chandwa P.S. case no. 158 of 2019 dtd. 23/11/2019.

(3.) Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel for the appellant, has submitted that the designated authority, while confirming the seizure of amount to the tune of Rs.2,64,42,000.00, has not considered the explanation furnished by the appellant wherein it has been stated that as per the cashbook Rs.1,78,45,734.00 was of M/s. Santosh Construction, Rs.17,30,310.00 was of collection of transport business of Sri Santosh Kumar Singh and Mrityunjay Kumar Singh, Rs.68,89,000.00 was of loan which was taken from family friends. It has been stated that since the appellant is Class-1 construction company and that period of time 4 Road construction work was going on and for making payment of daily wagers as well as miscellaneous expenditures, the seized amount was retained.