Patna High Court
Md. Nazar SaddamversusThe National Investigation Agency
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The appeal is dismissed; bail is not granted as the court finds a prima‑facie case and the UAPA bail embargo applicable.
Summary
The appellant, Md. Nazar Saddam, was arrested after police intercepted him and two others with a red motorcycle carrying fake Indian currency worth Rs.1,95,000 and digital evidence linking him to cross‑border counterfeit‑currency smuggling. He applied for bail, contending that the seizure list was prepared before the FIR was lodged, that Section 105 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita was not complied with, and that the seized notes were not sent to the forensic lab within the statutory time‑frame. The NIA argued that the charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, particularly Section 43D(5), prohibit bail unless the public prosecutor is heard and the court is convinced there are reasonable grounds for a prima‑facie case. The court examined the procedural allegations, the forensic‑lab delay, and the substantive evidence, including crypto‑currency transactions and intercepted communications, and found sufficient prima‑facie material to sustain the charges. Relying on the statutory bail embargo in UAPA and distinguishing the appellant’s situation from the Supreme Court’s decision in Sheikh Javed Iqbal, the bench dismissed the appeal and refused bail.
Issues considered
- Whether non‑compliance with Section 105 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita invalidates the seizure and affects bail eligibility
- Whether the delay in forwarding seized counterfeit currency to the forensic laboratory violates statutory mandates and warrants bail
- Whether the appellant’s right to liberty under Article 21 can override the bail restrictions imposed by UAPA
- Whether Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act bars bail when a prima‑facie case is established
- Whether the electronic and financial evidence establishes a prima‑facie case against the appellant
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 105
- Indian Penal Code — s. 111, 178, 179, 180, 181, 317(5), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 3(5), 61(2)
- Investigation of High Quality Counterfeit Indian Currency Offences Rules, 2013 — s. Rule 6
- Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 — s. 15, 43D(5), 43D(6)
Subjects
- bail
- counterfeit currency
- UAPA
- Section 43D
- prima facie evidence
- procedural violation
- Article 21
- forensic lab delay
- crypto transactions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.730 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2024 Thana- NIA District- Patna
======================================================
Md. Nazar Saddam S/O Md. Masihuzzaman R/o Mohalla- Bhikhanpur, Gomti
No. 3, Ward No. 31, P.S.- Ishakchak, Distt.- Bhagalpur- 812001
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The National Investigation Agency
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Syed Maslehuddin Ashraf, Sr. Advocate
Mr.Rana Hason, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Dr. Krishna Nandan Singh (A.S.G)
Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Spl.P.P., NIA
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
6 24-02-2026 Heard learned senior counsel for the appellant and
learned A.S.G. assisted by Mr. Arvind Kumar, learned coun-
sel for the N.I.A.
2. The sole appellant in this case is seeking setting
aside of the order dated 30.04.2025 passed by the learned
Special Judge, NIA Court, Bihar, Patna in Special Case
No.10 of 2024/R.C. No.17 of 2024/NIA/DLI, arising out of
Banjariya P.S. Case No.229 of 2024 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 317(5), 318(4), 61(2),
338, 336(3), 340(2), 111, 178, 179, 180, 181 and 3(5) of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.730 of 2025(6) dt.24-02-2026
2/15
Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023(in short BNS). Later on,
Sections 16, 18 and 20 of the Unlawful Activities
(Prevention) Act, 1967 were also added. By the impugned
order, the learned court has been pleased to reject the prayer
of the appellant for grant of bail.
3. The prosecution case is based on the self-
statement of ASI Indrajeet Paswan recorded on 05.09.2024
at 18.15 hrs at NH-28A near Kharwa Pool, Banjaria,
District-East Champaran, Motihari. In his self-statement,
the informant has stated that on 05.09.2024 at about 17:30
Hours in the evening, he along with other police personnel
proceeded for patrolling and vehicle checking. When they
reached near Shankar Dhaba, they got secret information
that that from Jhakiya village three persons on one without
number plate red coloured motorcycle are coming towards
Khandwa Pool. One of the three persons have beard who
was wearing blue colour T-shirt and black coloured pant
and was carrying black coloured backpack in front of his
stomach as also he is the person who was driving the
motorcycle. Second person was wearing Khaki coloured
Fullshirt and Blue coloured Jeans pant and third person was
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.730 of 2025(6) dt.24-02-2026
3/15
wearing white coloured T-shirt with lining and Black
coloured Jeans Pant. All of them were carrying fake Indian
currency notes(in short FICN). On this information, the
informant has informed the senior officials and with the
Shashtra Semma Bal personnel, they proceeded towards
Khandwa Pool where they found one red motorcycle with
above description and three persons on it were coming. On
seeing police personnel, they tried to flee away, but police
personnel chased them and nabbed all three persons. Seeing
this action of the police, nearby people gathered there.
Thereafter, police asked their names of aprrehended. They
told their names as (1) Md. Nazar Saddam, (2) Md. Waris
and (3) Md. Jakir Hussain. The informant requested the
people who have assembled there to become witness to the
production-cum-seizure list to which all of them refused by
saying that these accused persons are outsiders, if we
become witness, anything bad can happen to us. Thereafter,
two of the raiding team members, namely, Sukhram Bharti
and Aditya Kumar were made witnesses to the production-
cum-seizure list. Police asked for papers of the motorcycle
from Md. Nazar Saddam but he could not produce any
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.730 of 2025(6) dt.24-02-2026
4/15
papers. The Engine number and chasis number of the
motorcycle was worn out. It seems that the motorcycle was
stolen one. On search of black coloured backpack, some
clothes and hundred notes of 500 Rupees (total 50,000/-)
two Aadhar Cards of Md. Nazar Saddam(the Appellant) of
different addresses was found. On search of his pant,
hundred notes of 500 Rupees (total 50,000/-) was found. On
search of Md. Waris, from his pant’s pocket, eighty notes of
Rs. 500/- and from his shirt’s pocket twenty notes of Rs.
500/- (total Rs. 50,000/-) was found. And on search of Md.
Jakir Hussain, sixty notes or Rs.500/- from his pant’s pocket
and thirty notes of Rs.500/- from his shirt’s pocket (total
45,000/-) was found. Altogether from all the three persons,
three hundred ninety (390) fake notes total of Rs.1,95,000/-
was found. On further interrogation, they disclosed that they
used to carry these fake Indian currency from Pakistan via
Nepal through one Rajesh Sahni. They used to transport
these fake notes via Delhi to Sarfaraj @ Muzaffar Ahamd
resident of Jammu Kashmir. They disclosed that they have
done this many times earlier also. In the presence of two
witnesses named above, seizure list was prepared, on these
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.730 of 2025(6) dt.24-02-2026
5/15
three accused persons have put their signature. The
informant alleged that from the above facts, it is clear that
these three accused persons in conspiracy with other named
accused persons was trying to use fake Indian notes in the
market.
4. For purpose of bail, learned senior counsel for
the appellant has submitted firstly that in this case the
seizure list has been prepared at 5.15 PM, on the seizure list
P.S. case is mentioned, but it could not have been possible
at the time of preparation of the seizure list considering that
the FIR was lodged only at 6.45 PM. Learned senior
counsel further submits that the mandatory provision of
Section 105 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (in short
‘BNSS’) has not been followed. It is his submission that the
video recording of the search procedure was necessary
which has not been done and, therefore, it would create
huge doubt over the prosecution story.
5. Learned senior counsel for the appellant has
also pointed out by referring to the Investigation of High
Quality Counterfeit Indian Currency Offences Rules, 2013 (
in short ‘Rules of 2013’) that in this case as against the
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.730 of 2025(6) dt.24-02-2026
6/15
mandate of sub-rule (2) of Rule 6 the seized currency were
sent to the FSL, Patna after 21 days. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 6
mandates that the Investigation Officers shall forward the
seized currency by the quickest means to the notified
forensic authority, not later than forty-eight hours of the
seizure, and the notified forensic authority shall
communicate the results of the examination to the
requisitioning officer by the quickest possible means
including e-mail or facsimile.
6. Learned senior counsel has relied upon the
judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
Sheikh Javed Iqbal @ Ashfaq Ansari @ Javed Ansari
Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in 2024 INSC 534, to
submit that this Court in exercise of its constitutional power
may hold that the continuous incarceration of the appellant
would be in the breach of Article 21 of the Constitution of
India. On these grounds, prayer for bail of the appellant has
been made.
7. On the other hand, learned ASG submits that in
this case the appellant is facing charge inter-alia under
Section 15 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act,
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.730 of 2025(6) dt.24-02-2026
7/15
1967 (in short ‘UAPA’). The attention of this Court has
been drawn towards Section 43D(5) of the said Act. It is
submitted that the said provision clearly states that
Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code, no person
accused of an offence punishable under Chapters IV and VI
of this Act shall, if in custody, be released on bail or on his
own bond unless the Public Prosecutor has been given an
opportunity of being heard on the application for such
release. Proviso to sub-section (5) of Section 43D further
creates an embargo in clear terms saying that such accused
person shall not be released on bail or on his own bond if
the Court, on a perusal of the case diary or the report made
under section 173 of the Code is of the opinion that there
are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation
against such person is prima facie true. It is pointed out that
sub-section (6) of Section 43D specifically states that the
restrictions on granting of bail specified in sub-section (5) is
in addition to the restrictions under the Code or any other
law for the time being in force on granting of bail.
8. It is submitted that the respondent NIA has filed
a counter affidavit and they have brought on record the
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.730 of 2025(6) dt.24-02-2026
8/15
copy of the charge-sheet filed against the accused persons,
namely, Md. Nazar Saddam (the appellant), Md. Waris, Md.
Zakir Hushain and Sarfaraz@Muzaffar Ahmad Wani. The
role played by this appellant has been revealed in course of
investigation. The custodial interrogation of this appellant
discloses that he had received Rs.1,00,000/- in February
2024 from Sarfaraz@Muzaffar Ahmad Wani for handing
over the amount to one Mithilesh Tiwari, a resident of
Nepal, who in turn would provide Rs.2,50,000/- worth of
FICNs. This appellant reached Raxual and contacted
Mithilesh Tiwari. This appellant travelled to Anantnag, J&K
and handed over Rs.50,000/- worth of FICNs to
Sarfaraz@Muzaffar Ahmad Wani. Thereafter, this appellant
took a flight ticket from Srinagar to New Delhi. Paragraph
17.6 to 17.18 of the charge-sheet have been placed before
this Court.
9. It is submitted that details of transactions
conducted by the suspect, This appellant is close associate
of accused Sarfaraz@Muzaffar Ahmad Wani through his
Binance ID were analyzed. It was found that the there has
been transfer of 1.99 USDT, 500 USDT and 500 USDT on
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.730 of 2025(6) dt.24-02-2026
9/15
14.06.2024, 02.07.2024 and 09.07.2024 respectively. The
recipient of the said crypto currency was identified as
Salman Muhammad, a resident of Kashmora, Pakistan. It is
stated that during investigation a mobile phone was seized
during search at the house of this appellant on 19.02.2025.
Analysis of the extracted data of device revealed that it was
used by him during the relevant period of the crime in the
instant case. The examination of the extracted data from the
mobile phone uncovered a Facebook chat dated 09.07.2024
between Md. Nazar Saddam (the appellant) and Muzaffar
Ahmad Wani @ Sarfaraz in which they discussed about
USDT (cryptocurrency). Another incriminating chat has
been found in which this appellant has discussed about the
mode of payment and it was decided that payments had to
be made in USDT or into account. During the investigation
the digital devices were seized from the residence this
appellant and several transactions have been revealed in the
technical analysis of the mobile number used by him. The
technical analysis has revealed that he travelled to
Anantnag, J&K on two occasions during March 2024 in
connection with the procurement of FICNs from Nepal and
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.730 of 2025(6) dt.24-02-2026
10/15
their subsequent supply to this Sarfaraz@Muzaffar Ahmad
Wani in Anantnag, J&K, for circulation.
10. Learned ASG submits that so far as the plea of
the appellant that the seizure list has been prepared in
advance and the FIR has been lodged later on is concerned,
the learned trial court has discussed this aspect of the matter
in the impugned order and no fault may be found with the
same.
11. Referring to a recent judgment of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Naresh Kumar Garg Vs.
State of Haryana and Ors. reported in 2026 INSC 176,
learned ASG submits that assuming without admitting that
there is a non-compliance with Section 105 BNSS, it cannot
be argued by the appellant that because of the said non-
compliance the recovery of fake currency from his
possession would not be proved. The recovery would not
become illegal.
12. Learned ASG further submits that there may
be some delay in sending the fake currencies to the forensic
authority but that alone cannot be ground at this stage to be
looked into for purpose of grant of bail. In his submission,
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.730 of 2025(6) dt.24-02-2026
11/15
the plea of the appellant that he was not communicated as to
the grounds for his arrest has no basic foundations and this
issue is being raised at this stage. The appellant never
moved any competent court of law immediately after his
arrest and from the impugned order also it would appear
that this issue was raised/canvassed before the trial court.
13. It is submitted that the charges have already
been framed in this case and custody of the appellant is not
such that the ratio of the judgment in the case of Sheikh
Javed Iqbal @ Ashfaq Ansari @ Javed Ansari (supra)
which has been relied upon by the appellant would help the
appellant at this stage. In the said case, the Hon’ble
Supreme Court exercised its constitutional power and
release the appellant considering that he was in custody for
9 years and during this period of 9 years only two charge-
sheet witnesses were examined. That is not the issue or case
here.
14. We have heard learned senior counsel for the
appellant and learned ASG for the NIA and perused the
records. The learned trial court has passed the impugned
order after dealing with the pleas of the appellant with
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.730 of 2025(6) dt.24-02-2026
12/15
regard to preparation of the seizure list. It has been noticed
that in course of evening patrolling the accused persons
were intercepted, they tried to escape but they overpowered
and caught. From their separate possessions various
amounts of currency in the denomination of Rs.500/-
having a total face value of Rs.1,95,000/- were seized.
Certain disclosures were made by the accused persons.
They revealed that the consignment of FICN is being taken
to Jammu & Kashmir via Delhi to be handed over to one
Sarfaraz@Muzaffar Ahmad Wani. They further revealed
that they have been continuously indulging in such
procurement and delivery of consignment of FICN on
previous occasions.
15. The charge-sheet available on the record has
enlisted the role and activities played by the appellant. We
have referred some of the paragraphs which have been
placed before us. The investigation has found several
money transactions between the accused persons and it has
been found that this appellant had received the money in
bank account from Sarfaraz@Muzaffar Ahmad Wani for
supply of FICN. The technical analysis of the mobile of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.730 of 2025(6) dt.24-02-2026
13/15
said accused has revealed several incriminating materials
which prima-facie establishes that this appellant was
involved in the procurement of FICN. The chats of device
between Sarfaraz@Muzaffar Ahmad Wani and the appellant
revealed their conspiracy to bring Indian currency notes.
Several incriminating voice clips were found in the
electronic devices seized during the search conducted on
19.02.2025 in the instant case. Specimen voice samples of
this appellant and Sarfaraz@Muzaffar Ahmad Wani have
been obtained and sent to CFSL, New Delhi for comparison
with the incriminating audio clips recovered from the seized
devices. In one of the audio clips, security features of Indian
currency, including optical variable effects, transparency
features, etc. are discussed.
16. On going through the materials available on
the record, we find no reason to take a view that there is no
prima-facie evidence against the appellant. The mandate of
proviso to sub-section (5) of Section 43D clearly puts an
embargo on granting of bail if the court is of the opinion
that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the
accusation against such person is prima-facie true. In this
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.730 of 2025(6) dt.24-02-2026
14/15
case not only the cognizance of the offences has been taken
by the learned court below, in fact even charges have
already been framed, therefore, it is evident that there are
sufficient materials on the record which satisfied the test of
cognizance and framing of charge.
17. We are of the opinion that so far as judgment
of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sheikh Javed
Iqbal @ Ashfaq Ansari @ Javed Ansari (supra) is
concerned, it is not going to help the appellant because the
facts mentioned in the said judgment in paragraphs ‘7’ and
‘8’ would clearly show that in the said case the accused-
appellant had remained in custody for 9 years, charges were
framed in the year 2016 but during 9 years incarceration of
the appellant only two witnesses were examined. The
present case is clearly distinguishable. The appellant is in
custody only since 05.09.2024.
18. The submission of learned senior counsel for
the appellant as regards certain violation of the procedures
in the matter of search and seizure and non-sending of the
currency notes to the FSL cannot be a ground to be
considered at this stage for purpose of bail.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.730 of 2025(6) dt.24-02-2026
15/15
19. The effect of those and the nature of the
requirement of those provisions may only be considered at
the stage of the trial.
20. In our considered opinion, the appeal has no
merit. It is dismissed accordingly.
21. It is expected that the trial court shall proceed
with the trial expeditiously and all endeavours be made to
conclude the same as early as possible.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
( Praveen Kumar, J)
arvind/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.