Sudhir Tripathi S/o Kamlesh Kumar Tripathi Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Jagdishpur, P.S v. 1. Union of India
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:14010-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1039 of 2025 Sudhir Tripathi S/o Kamlesh Kumar Tripathi Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Jagdishpur, P.S. Lalapur, Prayagraj District Prayagraj (U.P.). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. Union of India (National Investigation Agency) Through Secretary Ministry of Home Affairs New Delhi. 2. Director General of Police Police Head Quarter Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3. Superintendent of Police National Investigation Agency, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, Branch OfÏce Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4. Station House OfÏcer P.S. Nia Raipur, Through Inspector / Chief Investigation OfÏcer, National Investigation Agencey Branch OfÏce Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 5. Station House OfÏcer P.S. Bhairamgarh District Bijapur, Chhattisgarh. ...Respondents For Petitioner For Respondent No. 1 : : For Respondents No. 3 to 5 :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. F.S. Khare, Advocate. Ms. Anmol Sharma, Central Government counsel. Mr. Himanshu Pandey and Mr. Ismail Sheikh, Advocates. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.03.25 10:38:02 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge
Decision
Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 24 .03.2025 1. Heard Mr. F.S. Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. Anmol Sharma, learned Central Government counsel, appearing for respondent No. 1 and Mr. Himanshu Pandey, learned counsel, appearing for respondents No. 3 to 5 along with Mr. Ismail Sheikh. 2. The present petition under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’) has been filed by the petitioner for quashing of the First Information Report (FIR) dated 24.08.2023 registered at Police Station National Investigation Agency (NIA), Raipur (C.G.) in Crime No. RC-01/2023/NIA/RPR for the offences punishable under Sections 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 13(1), 38(2) and 39(2) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 against the petitioner. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the Police of Police Station Bairamgarh, District Bijapur (C.G.) received information from informant that Santosh Kumar Gupta R/o Sanjaypara Bhairamgarh has kept one Pistol with bullets and another person will supply Pistol to him and the Pistol would be supplied by Gupta to one Hungo @ Hunga Madakami who is naxalite and member of Banned Communist Organization. The informant also gave the description of accused Santosh Gupta and also 3 inform that he has been seen to go towards Chhindbhatha. The Police OfÏcer without delay informed the higher ofÏcers about the information and thereafter, proceeded to the place Chhindbhatha and caught the accused Santosh Gupta and after personal search the Police recover 3 live cartridges and one mobile. The accused Santosh Gupta informed that one Prince Sharma is coming at old Bus Stand with a Pistol. On the basis thereof, the raid was organized. As per information of Santosh Gupta he identified that the person coming in a motorcycle is Prince Sharma, therefore, the police stopped the motor cycle, then the Driver of motorcycle told his name as Prince Sharma and the person who was sitting as pillion rider told his name is Vijay Sahu. After search, the police recovered the Pistol and one Samsung Galaxi Mobile from Prince Sharma and one Samsung Mobile from Vijay Sahu. Since the accused persons not produced any license to keep the arms, therefore, a seizure memo of revolver (Pistol), Cartridges, Mobile Phone and Motorcycle No. CG 20J 6404 was prepared and accused persons were arrested for the commission of offence u/s 34 of IPC, Section 25 of Arms Act 1959 and Section 13(1), 38(2) and 39(2) of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since as per order No. 11011/75/2023 NIA dated 23.08.2023 issued by Government of India Ministry of Home Affairs the above offences has to be investigated by National Investigation Agency (for short, ‘NIA’), therefore the offences have been registered again under Crime No. RC-01/2023/NIA/RPR on 24.08.2023 against the accused persons, namely, Santosh Gupta S/o Ram Kumar Gupta, Prince Sharma S/o Ram Gopal Sharma, Vijay Sahu 4 S/o Umakant Sahu and Hungo @Hunga Madakami S/o Dula. It is submitted that some of the accused were arrested and some accused were absconded. The charge-sheet has been filed against the accused persons who have been arrested. The search was continue about the absconded accused persons and investigation was going on. It is submitted that during investigation it is found that the money has been transferred by co-accused Prince Sharma in the account of present petitioner Sudhir Tripathi and he is also in connection with Suraj Nishad, resident of Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh, therefore, the respondent No. 4 arrested them on 15.10.2024 and the respondent No. 4 taken the remand of the accused Sudhir Tripathi and Suraj Nishad. 5. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that that the petitioner has no connection with the aforementioned crime and the NIA has arrested him only on the reason that Rs. 32,000/- was transferred to his Bank account on 25.12.2022 by co-accused Prince Sharma. He also submits that the co-accused Suraj Nishad had borrowed Rs. 50,000/- from petitioner on 05.01.2022. The Suraj Nishad did not pay the same within time, therefore, when the petitioner demanded the money and pressurized him then Suraj Nishad told that he has requested his brother-in-law who is residing presently at Bhairamgarh District Bijapur to arrange the money so that Suraj Nishad could return the same to the petitioner. He would submit that the brother-in-law of co- accused Suraj Nishad said to Suraj Nishad that co-accused Prince Shrama is his friend and he would send the money to petitioner through online banking. Suraj Nishad narrated above facts to the petitioner and thereafter, Suraj Nishad took the Bank account number of petitioner and 5 sent to his brother-in-law, thereafter, the amount Rs. 32,000/- was deposited by Prince Sharma in the account of petitioner. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in both the FIR's (Annexures P/1 & P/2), the name of petitioner is not mentioned. The petitioner submits that he has no any criminal record neither in Uttar Pradesh nor any other State. The petitioner is presently elected Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Jagdishpur District Prayagraj (U.P.). He further stated that merely on the basis of transfer of amount, the NIA has registered the crime against the petitioner and arrested him which is arbitrary and illegal. 7. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that after arrest, the father of petitioner made representation to the higher ofÏcers of home department Government of India New Delhi and the Higher OfÏcers of State Government and the Superior authority of the police of State of C.G. as well as the State human right commission Chhattisgarh with a request to looking to the illegal arrest of the petitioner and kindly be exonerate and release him from the case. Hence, this petition. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel, appearing for NIA submits that perusal of impugned FIR discloses commission of cognizable offences and investigation is still in progress, therefore, no interference is warranted at this stage. They further submits that the name of the petitioner has come into light during the course of further investigation which was being carried out by the NIA after the investigation transferred to it on 23.08.2023 and it is stated by the learned counsel for the NIA that the voice sample of the petitioner was obtained and the report of the said 6 voice sample was also obtained from the FSL and the same has been matched and the complexity of the petitioner has also come into light along with the co-accused, Suraj Nisad, whereas against the other co- accused persons, charge-sheet has already been submitted by the local Police before the competent Court. 9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the impugned FIR, prayers, pleadings and documents appended thereto. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and from perusal of the impugned FIR, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against him and further considering the fact that investigation is still in progress, we direct the concerned Superintendent of Police / Senior Superintendent of Police of NIA to ensure that the investigation of the present case be concluded expeditiously preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, if already not concluded and submit a Police Report under Section 173(2) of the Cr.P.C. (now under Section 193(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) before the competent Court in accordance with law. 11. Learned counsel appearing for NIA is directed to furnish a copy of this order to the Superintendent of Police / Senior Superintendent of Police of NIA for necessary information and compliance forthwith. 12. With the aforementioned observations/directions, present petition is is disposed off. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Judge Brijmohan