Krishna Kant Rana v. The State of Jharkhand

: Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate :Mr. P. D. Agrawal, A.P.P. : Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Spl. P. P. NIA ….. The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsel for the parties had no objection with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good. 08/04.03.2022 It appears that the order was passed on 28.02.2022 in this bail application in physical mode, but it has inadvertently been typed as ….. “Through Video Conferencing”.

2. In view of the above fact, the order passed on 28.02.2022 in this bail application stands modified accordingly to this effect.

3. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Harla P.S. Case No. 69 of 2021, registered for the offence under Sections 414/120B/34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 24 (i) (a) of the Atomic Energy Act.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State and learned Spl. P. P. for the NIA.

5. It is submitted that although the petitioner and other co- accused persons had been arrested in Harla P. S. Case No. 69 of 2021 for the offences under Sections 414/120/34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 24 (i) (a) of the Atomic Energy Act, however, during course of investigation, it was found by the police that seized materials are not the “Uranium”. It is submitted that other co-accused namely Pankaj Kumar and Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Kumar Mahato in B. P. No. 646 of 2021 and Mahavir Mahto @ Bal Ram Mahato in B. P. No. 653 of 2021 and Anil Kumar Singh @ Anil Singh in B. P. No. 667 of 2021 vide order dated 16.09.2021 have already been granted bail by the learned Court below. It is submitted that other co-accused Bapi Das @ 2 Bapi Chandra has also been granted bail by the learned Court below in B. P. No. 591 of 2021 vide order dated 24.08.2021. It is further submitted that the police has also submitted charge sheet under Sections 467/468/406/420/414/120B of Indian Penal Code, however, charge sheet under Section 24 (i) (a) of the Atomic Energy Act has not been submitted. It is submitted that the petitioner is in custody since

03.06.2021 and hence, he may be enlarged on bail.

6. On the other hand, learned A.P.P has submitted that after enquiry and the report of UCIL the police has not found seized materials, as ‘Uranium’, which would appear from para- 128 of the case diary. It is submitted that this Court has also called for a report from Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai and Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam, Tamil Nadu and Raja Ramanna Centre for Advanced Technology, Indore vide order dated

02.12.2021 and reports of the same were sent in the sealed cover on

07.01.2022 by the Police Inspector-cum- Officer In-charge of Harla P. S. before the Office of this Court and the Reports was opened on

28.02.2022 before this Court and hence necessary order may be passed.

7. Learned Spl.P.P. appearing on behalf of the NIA has submitted that since the recovered substance is not “Uranium”, hence NIA has not made any investigation and as such, necessary order may be passed.

8. Perused the F.I.R., case diary, impugned order passed by the learned Court below and the Report dated 27.12.2021 received from Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai and Report dated

31.01.2022 received from and Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam, Tamil Nadu and Report dated 03.01.2022 received from Raja Ramanna Centre for Advanced Technology, Indore respectively and which were sent by the Police Inspector-cum-Officer In-charge of Harla Police Station on 07.01.2022 before the office of this Court.

9. The sealed cover of the report opened on 28.02.2022 in presence of the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the NIA and after perusing the same 3 & informing all the parties of the same, then this case is fixed on

04.03.2021 i.e. today for argument.

10. After going through the report dated 27.12.2021, it would appear that Sri S. K. Jha, Head, RPS (NF), Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai has submitted sample Analysis Report and has recorded conclusion as follows:- “From the radiological monitoring and radioactivity analysis of the suspected materials, it is concluded that the samples of the suspected materials do not contain Uranium”.

11. From perusal of the report dated 31.12.2021 submitted by Dr. B. Venkatraman, Director, IGCAR, Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam, Tamil Nadu, it would appear that the sample were analyzed by the following various techniques and the results & conclusions are as follows: “ The samples were analysed by the following techniques: 1. Gamma spectroscopy 2. Inductively Coupled plasma Mass spectrometry 3. Thermal Ionisation mass spectrometry 4. Fluorescence spectroscopy 5. Infrared spectroscopy” Techniques 1 to 4 was used for the detection of uranium and technique 5 was used for identifying nature of sample. Results: 1. These Four samples does not contain Uranium 2. These Four samples does not emit any radiation. 3. The Nature of samples: Organic material Conclusion:-All these investigations indicated that these four samples do not contain uranium and they are of Organic Material.”

12. From perusal of the report dated 03.02.2022 submitted by Sri S. V. Nakhe, Outstanding Scientist & Director, Raja Ramanna Centre for Advanced Technology, Indore, it would appear from sample Analysis of RRCAT as follows:- “ 1. Gross-beta gamma measurements 2. Gross alpha measurements 3. Gamma spectrum measurements 4. X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) measurements” Conclusion:- Based on the measurement carried out at RRCAT, Indore on the samples (Sample A, Sample B, Sample C and Sample D), it is concluded that none of the samples contain Uranium or any other radioactive materials.”

13. This Court has earlier called for a report from the above Institutes vide order dated 02.12.2021 and thereafter samples were collected by the Teams of the respective Institutes. 4

14. Although the reports show that seized materials are not Uranium, but it would be appear that it was tried to be sold as the “Uranium”.

15. However, keeping in view of the reports received from Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai and Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam, Tamil Nadu and Raja Ramanna Centre for Advanced Technology, Indore that the recovered substance is not “Uranium” and considering the facts that all other co-accused persons have already been released on bail by the learned Court below and also considering the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the petitioner namely Krishna Kant Rana is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Twenty thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Miss Seema Kumari Minz, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bokaro or her successor Court in connection with Harla P.S. Case No. 69 of 2021, subject to the condition that one of the bailors must be own relative of the petitioner and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date till the conclusion of trial except for unforeseen circumstances and the petitioner must file an Undertaking before the learned Court below not to get indulged in such type of crime in future again, otherwise prosecution will be at liberty to take steps for cancellation his bail.

16. I.A. No. 5437 of 2021 stands disposed of. Kamlesh/ (Sanjay Prasad, J.)