According to the petitioners, they had entered into a Contract with A. A. Nayeem - Bidi Contractor who purchases Tendu Leaves and supplies it to other Bidi Factories.Out of the said amount of Rs. 8 lacs, a sum of Rs. 5.5 lacs was seized by the Police at Ballarshah on 28-5-2002 from the Vehicle parked in front of Hotel Arjun.At the time of seizure, the driver of the vehicle was present but the petitioners were away.According to the petitioners, the names of the petitioners do not figure anywhere in the F.I.R. lodged by Bapu Reddy.The petitioners had, therefore, sought a writ of Habeas Corpus as also for quashing and setting aside the prosecution of the petitioners for the offence under Sections 366, 367 of the Indian Penal Code and Arms Act and under the provisions of POTA.The prayer for Habeas Corpus has not been pressed.In Criminal.Writ Petition No. 255/2002, the petitioner has referred the contents of the F.I.R. in various paragraphs of the petition.According to the petitioner, he is not, in any manner, involved in the matter and the petitioner is at the most a victim of the crime and can never be associated in the crime.According to the petitioner, there are no allegations whatsoever for even the remotest possible involvement; that a sum of Rs. 8 lacs was advanced by the petitioner to the Unit Contractors viz. Khawaja Moiddin and Kamlakar (petitioners in Criminal Writ Petition No. 247/02), it was a business transaction between two contractors and at any rate other than what has been scribed in the receipt "Annexure C" the petitioner is not aware for what purpose the amount was borrowed by the said Unit Contractors; that assuming but without admitting that the money was allegedly passed on to Bakanna Naxalite gang by the Unit Contractors viz. M/s Khawaja Moiddin and Kamlakar, the same cannot amount to voluntary contribution or assistance rendered by the petitioner when there is nothing on record to infer that he had any knowledge that M/s Bapu Reddy and Narendra Reddy were kidnapped by the gang of Naxalites.It is also urged by the petitioner that the Government is not able to control the Naxalite activities and if at all somebody is required to part with money in order to protect himself and submits to extortion by the Naxalites, same cannot be construed as abetting the activities of the Naxalites and, therefore, no offence under Section 3(3) of POTA is made out.The petitioner, therefore, prays for quashing of registration of Crime No. 27/02 of Police Station, Sironcha, District : Gadchiroli.In the Return filed by the State, it is stated that on 2-6-2002 Bapu Reddy gave a written report in Telgu language stating that he was abducted on 19-5-2002 along with Narendra Reddy by the members of Bakkanna gang from Kaleshwar Unit to forest of Nandigaon.Bapu Reddy was threatened by Bakkanna to bring party fund of Rs. 9.84 lacs from his Unit contractor and he was compelled to write one chit.Narendra Reddy was sent with the said chit to his Contractor and after Narendra Reddy left, Bapu Reddy inquired from Bakkanna what he would do with such huge amount.Bakkanna replied that same would be required to fight against the Government and to procure arms and ammunition to sustain naxal activities to overthrow the Government and to sustain and secure their cadre.According to Bapu Reddy he managed to escape from the clutches of the gang under the pretext of ill health.He also disclosed that Adi Reddy was in their captivity when he escaped from the clutches of Bakkanna."I Bappu Reddy s/o Kachraya, R/o Chennu Aged 30 years at Kaleshwar Firm at Pusukpalli on 19-5-2002 was Kidnapped by members of Naxalite gang of Bakanna under threat of Fire Arms.They took me and one Narendra Reddy who was already kidnapped by the above Naxalite gang from they took us from Pentayal to forests of Nandiyal, Bakanna and the members of his gang has installed tents for living there.The abovesaid members of Naxalite gang threatened me to collect the sum of Rs. 9,84,000/- only from my unit Contractor for their party fund.They scribed a chit and handed over the same to Narendra Reddy to be delivered to our Unit Contractor.They sent Narendra Reddy.I, thereafter, enquired with them what they would do with such a huge amount? Bakanna replied that the same would be used by them for purchase of Fire arms and ammunition to fight the Government and the Police force, for the purpose of saving ourselves and for further establishing their party.Thereafter sometime I feigned illness and escaped from the clutches of the Naxalites I reached Nandi and Laxmipur from there I came to Chennur.This is my report and I pray for the Registration of the Offence.Note : The above "Dalam" gang had kidnapped me.Prior to my kidnapping Reddy was already Kidnapped and in their custody.sd/-Yours."On 28-5-2002 the petitioner A. A. Nayeem was called and inquiries were made with him about the abduction of his men from Geda Unit near Ittapali.According to Police, petitioner A. A. Nayeem denied any such abduction or receipt of any demand or party fund or ransom from Naxalites.JUDGMENT R.K. Batta, J.These petitions arise out of the same F.I.R. which is a subject matter of challenge in both the petitions and as such the petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by common order.We shall first refer briefly to the facts in these petitions.In Criminal Writ Petition No. 247/02, the petitioners case is that the F.I.R. does not disclose any offence against them and that there is no material to show that they are involved in any sort of terrorist activities and as such they seek quashing of the prosecution of the petitioners under Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred as POTA).According to the petitioners, petitioner No. 1 is an investing partner and petitioner No. 2 has working knowledge of business of Tendu leaves.Both the petitioners are Tendu Leave Contractors.Petitioner No. 1 is also a Registered P.W.D. Contractor.Petitioner No. 1 had applied to the Government for permission to collect Tendu Leaves and after complying with the necessary formalities entered into an Agreement with the Forest Department of State of Maharashtra for collection of Tendu Leaves.Prior to that on 25-5-2002 two trucks of Tendu Leaves belonging to Satyanarayan Reddy and his associates were burnt by Naxalite Bakkanna and his associates near Mahadeopur and Police has registered a Crime No. 34/2002 at Mahadeopur and another Crime No. 51/02 at Kataram under Sections 143, 364(A), 121-A read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 25 of the Arms Act. In those crime, petitioner No. 1 in Criminal Writ Petition No. 247/02 and one Kalimuddin (brother-in-law of Khwaja) were made accused in this connection, A. A. Nayeem was called by respondent No. 2 on 28-5-2002 and inquiry was made about abduction of his men from Geda Unit near Etapalli.Said A. A. Nayeem, however, denied of such abduction or receipt of any demand for party fund or ransom from Naxalites.On 28-5-2002 a night raid was conducted after receiving a clue that petitioner Kamlakar was hiding at Ballarsha and in the said raid the Police recovered Rs. 5.5 lacs cash from the Jeep used by the petitioner Kamlakar but said Kamlakar managed to escape.Subsequently, the Police raided a room where father of the petitioner No. 2 in Criminal Writ Petition No. 247/02 was found in possession of Rs. 1 lac which was seized by the Police.On 4-6-2002, the petitioners in Criminal Writ Petition No. 247/02 had surrendered before respondent No. 2 but despite interrogation they have not given any information.On 6th July, 2002 the petitioners disclosed certain facts on the basis of which Section 3(3) of POTA was added in Crime No. 27/02 and the petitioners in Criminal Writ Petition No. 247/02 were arrested.Respondents further contended that in Crime No. 15/01 of Sub Police Station Permili Police, certain documents have been seized from the Naxalities which proves that A. A. Nayeem paid a sum of Rs. 11.90 lacs as well as several other goods for the same purpose.In additional affidavit which is on record of Criminal Writ Petition No. 247/02 at pages 43 to 53, it is submitted that the investigation has revealed that petitioner No. 3 (reference to A. A. Nayeem) had not paid money under duress because the abducted person was released by Naxalites much before the time of actual payment.It is also stated therein that said A. A. Nayeem did not disclose in his statement on 28-5-2002 that any such payment was made.Learned advocates for the petitioners as also learned A.P. P. were heard in the matter at length.Shri V. R. Manohar, Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in Criminal Writ Petition No. 255/02 has basically and substantially made the following submissions before us.Bhajan Lal, it is submitted that there is absolutely no evidence as against the petitioners except for the confession recorded by the Police under Section 32 of POTA.It is also contended by him that petitioner No. 1 has entered into Tendu Leaves Business for the first time and that he has absolutely no nexus with the Naxalites.He also placed reliance on some authorities to which reference shall be made at the appropriate stage later.In the light of rival contentions, we shall now examine the material on record as also the material collected during investigation.On 2-6-2002, P.S.O. Sironcha had registered Crime No. 27/02 on a complaint given to him by Bapu Reddy.The complaint was given in Telgu and English translation of the same has been filed in Criminal Writ Petition No. 255/02 which reads as under :On 28-5-2002, Police recovered a sum of Rs. 5.5 lacs from the Jeep alleged to have been used by the petitioner Kamlakar on 28th night but said petitioner Kamlakar is alleged to have escaped.Police have then recovered a sum of Rs. 1 lac from the possession of the father of petitioner No. 2 Kamlakar.The petitioners in Criminal Writ Petition No. 247/02 had surrendered on 4th July, 2002 and after their interrogation on 6th July, 2002 their confessional statements were recorded, on the basis of which an offence under Section 3(3) of POTA was registered on 12-6-2002 and petitioner A. A. Nayeem was arrested.

Sections cited: Section 149 in The Indian Penal Code, Section 155 in The Indian Penal Code, Section 107 in The Indian Penal Code, Section 156 in The Indian Penal Code, Section 147 in The Indian Penal Code, Section 143 in The Indian Penal Code, Section 148 in The Indian Penal Code