1 2025:CGHC:53765-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2156 of 2025 Rahul Kumar Manjhi S/o Indralal Manjhi, aged about 25 years R/o Ward No. 8, Satpura Road, Tonk, Amilkoni, Tehsil Tyonthar, Rewa (M.P.) ... Petitioner versus Union of India Through National Investigation Agency, Sector 24, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent _________________________________________________________ For Petitioner : Mr. Utsav Mahiswar, Advocate For Respondent/NIA : Mr. B. Gopa Kumar, Sp. P.P. and Mr. Ismail Shaikh, Sr. P.P. _________________________________________________________ Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J. 04.11.2025 1. This appeal under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved the impugned order dated 25.06.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, NIA (Schedule Crime), Bastar at Jagdalpur (C.G.) in Special NIA Case No.07 of 2024, whereby the regular bail application filed by the appellant under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S. has been rejected. ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA 2 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 11.01.2023, a confidential information was received by the police that a co- accused namely Santosh Gupta resident of Sanjay Para, Bhairamgarh, has in his possession live pistol bullets, and someone is supposed to supply him pistol, to which Santosh Gupta intends to active supply to an Maoist/Naxalite named Hungo Madkami alias Hunga, who is the Area Committee Member (ACM) of Bhairamgarh and is a president of Revolutionary People's Committee (RPC), Kotmeda. Aafter receiving the information, a police team apprehended the co-accused Santosh Gupta near Sanjaypara and 03 live cartridges were seized from him and upon interrogation, the co accused disclosed that one Prince Sharma from Bijapur was going to deliver the pistol. Acting upon the information, the police intercepted two persons coming from Bijapur on a white Honda motorcycle. The co accused itendified the other co accused Prince Sharma. Upon search one pistol and one Samsung galaxy mobile phone was recovered from Prince Sharma. Panchnama was prepared for the search and recovery of weapon and a notice under Section 91 of Cr.P.C was served upon Prince Sharma to produce valid documents or permit regarding possession of the said weapon. 3. In reply to the notice, co accused Prince Sharma accepted that he did not possess any valid license or document of the pistol. Memorandum statement was taken wherein he stated that his brother in law Prabhat Mishra along with the present appellant 3 has helped him to procure the weapon from Prayagraj (U.P). Acting upon the memorandum statement of Prince Sharma, the present appellant was arrested on 14.01.2023 for commission of offences punishable under Section 34 of IPC, Section 25 of the Arms ct and Section 13(1), 38(2), 39(2) of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act and a mobile phone, rupees 300 and a piece of paper having transaction details were recovered from him. 4. Upon his arrest, the appellant moved an application under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of bail before the learned Special Court under the NIA, which got rejected vide impugned order dated 25.06.2025 by the learned Special Judge NIA (Schedule Crime), Bastar at Jagdalpur (C.G.). Hence, this appeal. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has not committed any act attracting offences punishable under Section 34 of IPC, Section 25 of Arms Act; and Sections 13(1), 38(2), 39(2) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. The appellant has been arrayed as an accused without any cogent evidence, solely on the basis of suspicion he has been implicated. He further submits that the allegation against the appellant is that he has facilitated in the transfer of revolver which was purchased by one Prince Sharma who is member of proscribed terrorist Organization CPI (Maoist). He further submits that supplementary charge-sheet has also been filed against the appellant and his involvement came into light in memorandum statement of Sudhir 4 Tripathi and Prince Sharma and there is no other evidence to show his involvement in the naxalite or CPI (Maoist) activities. He further submits that the appellant is in jail since 14.01.2023 i.e. about 2 years and 10 months and the trial will take considerable time for its conclusion, hence the appellant may kindly be released on bail. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the NIA, opposes the submission made and submits that 16 witnesses have been examined out of 27 witnesses. He also submits that involvement of the appellant in the naxalite or CPI (Maoist) activities cannot be ruled out as there are ample evidences against the appellant which come to fore after investigation under the provisions of the UAPA, as the case was transferred from state police. Learned counsel would submit that the appellant was the facilitator of the meeting and he was present in the meeting and co-accused Sudhir Tripathi arranged the revolver for Rs. 32,000/- and said amount was paid through PhonePe from Prince Sharma. The said seized revolver was purchased for the purpose of further handing over of the same to the hard-core CPI (Maoist) Hungo Mudkami. He also submits that the present appellant had an active role in the procurement of weapons and was very much in the meeting in which all this conspiracy took place. He further submits that bail applications of three co-accused have already been rejected by this Court. Thus, this Criminal Appeal claiming for bail, is liable to be dismissed. 5 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended with the appeal memo. 8. Considering the entire facts situation of the case; particularly considering the seriousness of the allegations; further considering the fact that the appellant was the facilitator of the meeting and he was present in the meeting and co-accused Sudhir Tripathi arranged the revolver for Rs. 32,000/- and said amount was paid through PhonePe from Prince Sharma; and the said seized revolver was purchased for the purpose of further handing over of the same to the hard-core CPI (Maoist) Hungo Mudkami; and also the fact that the trial is in progress and out of 27 prosecution witnesses, 16 have already been examined and they have supported the prosecution case, and the bail application of three co-accused have already been rejected. It is also apparent that the 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. Further considering the fact, that the trial is in progress and if the appellant is released on bail, there is every likelihood that he would abscond and trial would be hampered, hence, at this stage, we are not inclined to grant bail to the appellant. 6 9. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra