1 2025:CGHC:26558-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1160 of 2025 Brijesh Kumar Singh S/o Ram Sushil Singh Aged About 38 Years Resident Of Stadium Para Manpur, District : Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. National Investigation Agency (NIA) Through Its Superintendent of Police, Nia Branch Office, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Home Secretary, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3. SP Y.P. Singh District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh. 4. Additional Sp Mayank Gurjar District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh. 5. Sdop Mayank Tiwari District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh. 6. DSP Tejendra Diwan District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh. 7. Check Pal Sehrawat Dy. Superintendent of Police, NIA Branch Office, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 8. Shishupal Inspector, NIA Branch Office, Ranchi, Jharkhand. 9. Baliram Singh CT, NIA, Branch Office, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ...Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Yuvraj Singh, Advocate. For NIA : Mr. B. Gopa Kumar, Advocate through VC. For State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.06.24 10:41:34 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 23.06.2025 1. Heard Mr. Yuvraj Singh, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. B. Gopa Kumar, learned counsel, appearing for NIA through video conferencing and Mr. Shailenda Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State. 2. Though the Registry has made an objection about the maintainability of the criminal appeal, Mr. B. Gopa Kumar, learned counsel, appearing for the NIA has submitted that the instant appeal is maintainable, as such, we proceed to hear the appeal on merits. 3. This criminal appeal under Section 21(1) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (for short, ‘NIA Act’) is directed against the impugned order dated 24.04.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (NIA), Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) in Ex C.A. No. 4875 of 2025, Filing No. 1401 of 2025, arising out of Crime No. 28 of 2023 registered at Police Station NIA, BO Raipur for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 147, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act as well as Sections 38(1)(2) and 39(1)(2) of the Unlawful Activity Prevention Act, 1967 (for short, ‘Act of 1967’), by which the appellant's application has been rejected seeking return of illegally seized electronic devices and provision of search operation video footage, finding no merit. 3 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is a Primary School Teacher and he has aggrieved with the inaction on the part of the authorities including illegal searches, coercive interrogations, including repeated interrogations without notice following the murder of Birjhu Ram Taram, aimed at falsely implicating him in Naxal-related cases, and threats, violate his fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and have caused reputational damage. emotional distress, and disruption to the appellant and his family. He further submits that the appellant is a dedicated teacher serving at Primary School, Kohka, Tahsil Manpur, has been subjected to relentless harassment since the murder of Birjhu Ram Taram by naxalites with AK-56 weapon (Case No. 0028 of 2023, police station Aundhi, RC-16/2024/NIA/RPR). Following the incident, the local police and NIA conducted prolonged interrogations of several villagers, including the appellant and his brother, without prior notice. On multiple occasions, the appellant was summoned to the Mohla SP Office, NIA Office in Raipur, and Manpur Police Station for questioning, totaling more than ten instances, all without notice, causing significant distress and disruption to his professional and personal life. The authorities have demanded that he facilitate the surrender of a Naxalite named Rupesh Mandavi, a resident of the same area, within a week, threatening to implicate him in Naxal-related cases if he failed to comply. 5. It has been contended that a raid was conducted on 24.02.2025, at about 4:30 AM and the NIA, accompanied by ITBP forces and anti- landmine vehicles, conducted a six-hour raid at the appellant residence under Case No.RC-16/2024/NIA/RPR. Although the search warrant 4 named only the appellant, devices belonging to his brother, mother and cousin were seized, with passwords forcibly obtained or accessed without passwords, raising concerns of potential tampering. It has been lastly contended that the appellant preferred an application before the learned Special Judge (NIA), Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) for return of the articles, which was rejected by the impugned order dated 24.04.2025, against which, this criminal appeal has been filed. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the NIA as well as State vehemently opposed the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant and submitted that the evidence which have been collected during the course of investigation against the appellant goes to show his active participation and involvement in the naxal operations. He further submits that the search was conducted and some incriminating articles; such as electronic devices and some video footage were seized. It has been contended that the the investigation is going on and at this stage, the authorities are not in a position to return the said articles to the appellant, hence, the criminal appeal filed by the appellant deserves to be rejected. They also submit that in an identical case this Court vide order dated 19.06.2025 dismissed the appeal bearing CRA No. 1142 of 2025. 7. We have heard the learned appearing for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also went through the records with utmost circumspection. 8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, seizure of incriminating documents and 5 articles, it is apparent that this State and the Centre are combating and are making all their efforts along with their machineries to make the State of Chhattisgarh free from naxalite activities as this State is gripped with naxalite activities causing endanger to the internal security of the State as well as common people, which also effect the national interest, hence, at this stage, this Court is not inclined to direct the authorities to return of electronic device as well as video footage to the appellant as the investigation is still going on and the articles seized is the case property. Accordingly, the instant criminal is rejected. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the learned trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan