Case Note & Summary
The National Investigation Agency (NIA) appealed against the judgment and order dated 31st December 2013 of the learned Special Court for NIA cases in Special SC No.01/2013, which acquitted the respondents (accused A3, A4, A5, A6, A10, and A11) of various offences under the Indian Penal Code, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, and the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. The case arose from an incident on 16th October 2009, when an improvised explosive device (IED) carried by A1 and A2 on a scooter exploded near Reliance Trade Centre, Margao, Goa, injuring them. A case was registered under Sections 120B, 121A, 122, 123, 427 IPC read with Sections 16, 17, 18, 23 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and Sections 3, 4, 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. The prosecution alleged that the respondents were part of a criminal conspiracy to commit terrorist acts. The Special Court acquitted the respondents, finding the evidence insufficient to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The NIA appealed under Section 21 of the National Investigation Act, 2008. The High Court, applying the principles governing appeals against acquittal under Section 378 Cr.P.C., held that the appellate court should not interfere unless the findings are perverse or unreasonable. The Court found that the Special Court had properly appreciated the evidence and that the prosecution had failed to establish the conspiracy. The appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal was upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Appeal against acquittal - Section 21 of National Investigation Act, 2008 read with Section 378 Cr.P.C. - The principle governing appeals against acquittal under Section 378 Cr.P.C. applies to appeals under Section 21 of the NIA Act. The appellate court should not interfere unless the findings are perverse or unreasonable. (Paras 5, 10-12)
B) Criminal Conspiracy - Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 - Sections 16, 17, 18, 23 - Explosive Substances Act, 1908 - Sections 3, 4, 5 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 120B, 121A, 122, 123, 427 - The prosecution failed to prove the charge of criminal conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence of recovery of explosive substances and statements of witnesses did not establish a meeting of minds or common intention among the accused. The acquittal was based on proper appreciation of evidence and not perverse. (Paras 6-9, 13-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of the respondents by the Special Court for NIA cases was perverse and liable to be set aside in appeal.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the acquittal of the respondents.
Law Points
- Appeal against acquittal
- Section 21 of National Investigation Act
- 2008
- Section 378 Cr.P.C.
- standard of proof in criminal conspiracy
- Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act
- 1967
- Explosive Substances Act
- 1908
Case Details
2020 LawText (BOM) (09) 52
Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 2014
M.S. Sonak, Smt. M. S. Jawalkar
Mr. P. Faldessai (APP for Appellant), Mr. Sanjeev Punalekar (for Respondent Nos.1 to 4), Mr. Nagesh Takbhate Joshi (for Respondent Nos.5 and 6)
National Investigation Agency
Vinay Talekar, Vinayak Patil, Dhananjay Ashtekar, Dilip Mangaonkar, Prashant Ashtekar, Prashant Juvekar
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeal against acquittal by the National Investigation Agency under Section 21 of the National Investigation Act, 2008.
Remedy Sought
The appellant (NIA) sought to set aside the acquittal of the respondents and convict them for offences under IPC, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, and Explosive Substances Act, 1908.
Filing Reason
The NIA appealed against the judgment and order dated 31st December 2013 of the Special Court for NIA cases acquitting the respondents.
Previous Decisions
The Special Court for NIA cases in Special SC No.01/2013 acquitted the respondents on 31st December 2013.
Issues
Whether the acquittal of the respondents by the Special Court was perverse and liable to be set aside in appeal.
Whether the prosecution proved the charge of criminal conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt.
Submissions/Arguments
Mr. Faldessai, APP for the appellant, submitted that the appeal is under Section 21 of the National Investigation Act, 2008, and agreed that the principle under Section 378 Cr.P.C. governs appeals against acquittal.
The respondents' counsel argued that the acquittal was based on proper appreciation of evidence and not perverse.
Ratio Decidendi
The appellate court should not interfere with an acquittal unless the findings are perverse or unreasonable. The Special Court had properly appreciated the evidence, and the prosecution failed to prove the conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt.
Judgment Excerpts
Heard Mr. P. Faldessai, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the National Investigation Agency (NIA)- Appellant herein.
This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 31st December, 2013, made by the learned Special Court for NIA cases acquitting the aforesaid accused persons from various offences which they were charged with in Special SC No.01/2013.
Mr. Faldessai, at the outset submits that this is an appeal under Section 21 of the National Investigation Act, 2008. However, he agrees that the principle relating to appeals against the acquittal as provided under Section 378 of Cr. P.C., will govern the adjudication of this appeal.
Procedural History
On 16th October 2009, an IED explosion occurred near Reliance Trade Centre, Margao, Goa. Crime No.338/09 was registered. The Special Court for NIA cases in Special SC No.01/2013 acquitted the respondents on 31st December 2013. The NIA filed Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 2014 before the High Court of Bombay at Goa. The appeal was reserved on 15th September 2020 and pronounced on 19th September 2020.
Acts & Sections
- National Investigation Act, 2008: Section 21
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.): Section 378
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 120B, 121A, 122, 123, 427
- Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967: 16, 17, 18, 23
- Explosive Substances Act, 1908: 3, 4, 5
