1 2025:CGHC:21276-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 803 of 2025 Union of India Through National Investigation Agency, Sector 24, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Raipur, C.G. ... Appellant versus 1 - Santosh Gupta S/o Ram Kumar Gupta Aged About 36 Years, R/o Sanjay Para, Bhairamgarh, Bijapur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Prince Sharma S/o Ram Gopal Sharma Aged About 35 Years R/o Bijapur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-tile taken from the Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. B. Gopa Kumar, Advocate. For Respondents No.1 & 2 : None Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 08/05/2025 1. The present Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the order dated 13.03.2025 passed by the learned NIA Special Court, Jagdalpur whereby the application for the appellant for taking the FSL report on record has been rejected. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, a crime was registered on 11/01/2023 by the Bhairamgarh Police Station, District Bijapur ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.05.15 13:44:59 +0530 2 having Crime No. 01/2023 under Section 34 of IPC, Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959, Sections 13(1), 38(2) & 39 (2) of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 in connection with terrorist act of the banned terrorist organization i.e. CPI (Maoist) and its frontal organizations. The allegations in the report in essence are that, the Bhairamgarh Police had arrested one person, Santosh Gupta, S/o Ram Kumar Gupta resident of Sanjay Para, Bhairamgarh, Bijapur, Chhattisgarh. 3. During the personal search of accused persons, 03 live bullets were recovered from their possession. Upon examination, accused Santosh Gupta revealed that he was in contact with Hunga Madkami, a cadre of Proscribed Terrorist Organisation CPI(Maoist) for arranging arms and ammunitions with the help of Prince Sharma, S/o Ram Gopal Sharma, resident of Bijapur, Chhattisgarh. The accused Prince Sharma and his associate namely Vijay Sahu were subsequently arrested by the State Police. During personal search of Prince Sharma, a revolver was found from his possession. The above said Santosh Gupta, Prince Sharma, Vijay Sahu and others were involved in committing of unlawful activities and these persons are also associated with the prescribed banned organization called CPI (Maoist) and they extended their support for furthering the activities of the above said banned terrorist organization. Subsequently, two more accused persons namely, Prabhat Misha, S/o Anil Mishra, résident of Padiwar, Rewa district, Madhya Pradesh, Rahul Manjhi, S/o Inder Lal Manjhi, resident of Tok, Rewa, Madhya Pradesh on 14/01/2023 connected with the same heinous crime were arrested. After completion of the investigation, charge- 3 sheet against all the above named five accused persons was filed by the State police on 07-07-2023 before the learned Second Addl. Sessions Judge, Dantewada with a prayer to continue further investigation under section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. 4. Central Government had received information regarding registration of F.I.R. No. 01/2023 dated 11/01/2023 at Bhairamgarh Police Station District Bijapur. Subsequent to the above turn of events, the Central Government was of the view that Scheduled Offence under the NIA Act, 2008 has been committed and giving full regard to the gravity of the offences and security ramifications, it was found to be necessary that the offence need to be investigated by the National Investigation Agency in accordance with the NIA Act 2008. In pursuance of the opinion formed by Central Government an order was issued exercising power u/s. 6 (5) read with Section 8 of NIA Act 2008 on 23/08/2023. 5. In furtherance to the above order of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, the NIA had re-registered the said F.I.R. as RC No.01/2023/NIA/RPR on 24/08/2023. Thereafter the appellant had filed an application for seeking voice sample to be taken for the purpose of electronic evidence before the learned trial court. Subsequent to the rejection of the said application a criminal appeal was filed before this Hon'ble Court having CRA No. 1092/2024 which was allowed by this court by order dated 29/07/2024. Appellant in the same matter again filed an application before the learned trial court for interrogation of the accused persons in judicial 4 custody in view of the subsequent arrest of further accused persons in this case during the further investigation and the said application was to be rejected by the learned trial court. Subsequent to it an appeal was filed before this Court against the said rejection order which was also allowed by this Court on 20/02/2025 in the Criminal Appeal No.238/2025. 6. The criminal appeal No. 1092/2024 filed by the appellant was allowed by this Court stating that "the prosecution agency is directed to ensure that voice sample of the accused / respondent are recorded within a period of two weeks from today and the report of same be submitted before the trial court by the director of competent forensic laboratory after examination from the concerned forensic lab within a further period of eight weeks". Subsequent to the above order passed by this Court, the NIA has taken the voice sample from the concerned accused persons/respondent within the prescribed period of two weeks as instructed by this Court on 10/08/2024 and same was forwarded to the State Forensic Science Laboratory Raipur for the forensic examination and the forensic report on 16/08/2024. 7. Pursuant to the above turn of events, after receiving the voice sample from the NIA, the State FSL Raipur had returned the samples with some queries on 11/09/2024, which were promptly addressed and responded on 17/09/2024 to the State FSL Raipur. 8. The report was finally received by the NIA on 04/03/2025 from the State FSL department and the same was submitted before the 5 learned trial court on 10/03/2025 by tendering an application for taking the said report on records as evidence in this case. However, the application of NIA was rejected by the learned trial court on 13/03/2025 stating that the order passed by this Hon'ble High Court in CRA No 238/2025 had stipulated a time frame and the FSL report submitted cannot be taken into account/record as it has not been submitted within the stipulated time frame. Hence, looking into the seriousness of the matter in this case, it is most humbly prayed that this appeal may be allowed. 9. It was argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that for the purpose of getting evidence with regard to the communication between the accused persons and other relevant persons, it was found essential to get the voice sample for the purpose of bringing electronic evidence and its authenticity before the learned trial Court. It was further argued that this Court while passing order in CRA No.1092 of 2024 in paragraph 9 has categorically specified and directed the director of competent forensic laboratory to submit the report before the trial Court. He would lastly contend that an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has already been submitted before the learned trial Court in order to grant permission for summoning the CIO of NIA and experts of FSL department. The said application is pending for consideration before the learned trial Court on 29/03/2025 and the trial has not yet concluded, therefore, it is prayed that the instant appeal may be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside. 6 10. As per the office report dated 29/04/2025 the notice has been served upon the Respondents No.1 & 2 through the trial Court and they are stated to be in jail and it is stated that no one has appeared on behalf of the respondents to contest this petition. 11. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also perused the material available on record. 12. Considering the fact that the trial is in progress and looking to the nature of offence the respondents No. 1 & 2 are being tried by the Special NIA Court. It appears that for just decision of the case any witness is to be examined and for which the prosecution has made an application. The trial Court should have taken the FSL report on record and thereafter, the accused can also be confronted with the said evidence and take defence which he chooses. It appears that in the interest of justice and for just decision of the case, the said application ought to have been allowed by the trial Court, but the same has been rejected. 13. It is a case where the court below should not have rejected his application. Rather, the court below should have considered the relevant provisions in its proper perspective and should have given a wider interpretation while considering the said application. In the event such an application is moved, the court shall summon, examine or recall the witness at any stage of trial or other proceedings. Therefore, if the powers have been conferred upon the court to recall any witness at any stage and if the prosecution is able to make out a case for justified reasons that the voice sample of 7 accused/respondents are required, the court below ought not to have rejected his application. 14. Accordingly, the appeal stands allowed. The order dated 13/03/2025 stands set aside. The application filed by the appellant for taking the said report on record as evidence in this case and the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and shall proceed in accordance with law to conclude the trial expeditiously. SD/- SD/- Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice ashu