Manipur High Court on Thursday set aside a Special Judge NIA court’s order granting bail to Mark Haokip, who is accused of waging war against India for creation of an independent ‘Government of People’s Democratic Republic of Kukiland.’
The Special Judge (NIA) granted default bail to two accused, namely Lhaineikim Lhouvum alias Kikim and Mark Thangmang Haokip on the ground that the subject chargesheet was filed against the accused without obtaining prosecution sanction order; therefore, the charge-sheet ought to be considered as an incomplete charge-sheet, entitling the accused for the grant of default bail.
A double bench of Manipur High Court comprising Chief Justice Siddharth Mridul and justice A Guneshwar Sharma referred to case of Judgebir Singh and Ors vs National Investigation Agency where it stated that a chargesheet filed without prosecution sanction cannot be termed as an incomplete chargesheet, and the accused cannot claim a right to be released on default bail for want of sanction in this circumstance.
“From the ratio of Judgebir Singh, it is now a settled proposition of law that, chargesheet filed without prosecution sanction order cannot be treated as an incomplete chargesheet so as to enable the accused to claim an indefensible to be released on default bail,” the HC stated.
Further, the HC opined that “we are concomitantly of the view that, the learned Special Judge (NIA), Imphal West erred grossly in holding that the subject chargesheet filed without prosecution sanction order from the competent authority is an incomplete chargesheet and the accused is entitled to be released on bail.”
The HC also considered that the chargesheet without sanction order was submitted on November 25, 2022 and the default bail application was filed only on March 18, 2023. In the circumstances, the impugned order of March 28, 2023 in Cril. Misc. (B) Case Nos. 3 of 2023 and 45 of 2023 releasing the accused on default bail is contrary to law and accordingly set aside.
The HC further considered that the default bail application under Section 167 CrPC being Cril. Misc. (B) case NO. 45 of 2023 is not maintainable as the same was filed only on March 17, 2023 that is much later after submission of the chargesheet on November 25, 2022.
It was also clarified that the regular bail application, i.e., Cril. Misc. (B) Case Nos. 3 of 2023 filed by the accused was not considered at all by the Special Court and the same is therefore remanded back for a decision on merit in terms of the mandatory provisions of Section 43D(5) of UAPA.
“The accused is permitted to place additional facts and documents relating to subsequent events, if any, before the Special Judge (NIA) Imphal West, and the state is also permitted to file a reply to such new facts and documents”, stated the HC.
Therefore, the pending applications have been disposed of in terms of the mentioned observations and directions, it stated.
The interim orders are merged with the final order; however, the last issue framed for consideration, i.e., applicability of the proviso to Section 43D(5) of UAPA while deciding default bail application under Section 167(2) CrPC, is kept open to be decided in an appropriate case, the HC stated.
Mark Thangmang Haokip was arrested from Kishangarh, New Delhi on May 24, 2022, on the charge of hatching a conspiracy to wage war against the Government of India by identifying himself as the president of a ‘separatist outfit’ Government of People’s Democratic Republic of Kukiland.
