ORDER S. Talapatra, J. 1. This is a petition under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 by Sri Utpal Debbarma, the accused petitioner, hereinafter called 'the petitioner', for granting bail in connection with G.R. Case No. 280/ 1998 (arising from East Agartala P.S. Case No. 37/1998), pending in the Court of the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Tripura, Agartala. The petitioner has been in custody since 11.07.2011 and his bail application had been rejected consecutively by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Tripura, Agartala. From the records it appears that on 12.4.2012, the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Tripura, Agartala, rejected the bail prayer of the petitioner with the following observations: The offence as alleged against the accused Utpal Debbarma is very serious. Moreover I/O has prayed for custody trial of the accused. So in such a position, 1 am not inclined to allow him bail and thus the bail prayer is rejected. The accused is remanded to J/C till 25.042012. 2. The genesis of the case is rooted in the First Information Report filed by Debajyoti Gautam, Officer In-charge, East Agartala Police Station. In the said report, the informant alleged that the FIR named accused along with their associates with an intent to establish an independent "Borok Land Twipra" by way of secession from the territory of India formed a dreaded organisation for waging armed struggle in alliance with the other armed organisation namely, NSCN of Nagaland etc. and, to achieve that object, to incite indigenous people of Tripura for participating in the said secessionist activities. It has been further alleged that the said insurgent group namely, National Liberation Front of Twipra (NLFT), in pursuasion of their aim and object, engaged it in several violent and unlawful activities like killing of civilians, police, security personnel, abduction of civilians for realising ransom, extortion of funds from the public including the businessman and traders. The said insurgent group has allegedly been procuring large quantity of arms and ammunition through the clandestine/illegal channels and inducting them secretly in Tripura through the neighbouring countries. They are establishing and maintaining camps in the neighbouring country for the purpose of safe sanctuary, training, procuring of arms and ammunition. The said group has been declared as unlawful for causing and fomenting communal hatred between the tribal and non-tribal communities in Tripura for purpose of achieving their secessionist 'dream'. They are establishing and maintaining camps in the neighbouring country for the purpose of safe sanctuary, training, procuring of arms and ammunition. The said group has been declared as unlawful for causing and fomenting communal hatred between the tribal and non-tribal communities in Tripura for purpose of achieving their secessionist 'dream'. It is the Central Government which declared the NLFT as an unlawful organisation. On the basis of the said First Information Report, the East Agartala RS. Case No. 37/1998 was registered under Sections 153(A)/ 153(B)/ 120(B)/ 121(A)/ 122 of IPC and Sections 10/ 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. 3. It appears further from the records that the petitioner while crossing the Mizoram-Tripura border through a passage near Damcherra, was intercepted on tip or a secret information by 26, Assam Rifles, Aizawl and was nabbed with some incriminating materials. Thereafter, the petitioner was handed over to the Tripura Police through one Deputy Superintendent of Police (CID), Agartala. On his arrest, he was produced as a co-accused in the said East Agartala P.S. Case No. 37/ 1998 (corresponding to GR. Case No. 280/ 1998). The final form under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. was filed by the police preceding the arrest of the petitioner in the said case and on arrest of the petitioner, the police has filed a supplementary charge-sheet No. 180 against the petitioner on having been found a prima facie case established on the basis of the materials collected during the investigation under Sections 153(A)/153(B)/120(B)/121(A)/122 of IPC and Section 10/ 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. During investigation from the statement of witnesses, seized articles and circumstances, following evidences have transpired against the arrested NLFT extremist, viz. accused Utpal Debbarma to form a prima facie case: (1) The case was registered on the continuous unlawful as well as anti-national activities of NLFT Organizations viz. Criminal conspiracy, waging war against the country promoting disharmony, ill feeling, enmity and hatred between two communities etc. (2) The NLFT Organization is a banned organization since 3rd April, 1997 as per Notification of the Central Government duly upheld by Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Tribunal (3) They adopted the illegal constitution of "National Liberation Front of Twipra' on 22nd December, 1991 (as mentioned in the preamble of the constitution) having total 34 articles with their own monogram. (2) The NLFT Organization is a banned organization since 3rd April, 1997 as per Notification of the Central Government duly upheld by Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Tribunal (3) They adopted the illegal constitution of "National Liberation Front of Twipra' on 22nd December, 1991 (as mentioned in the preamble of the constitution) having total 34 articles with their own monogram. Their illegal National Anthem is in the constitution in Borok Language in the first page. This refers to seizure list dtd. 23.08.11 in connection with the case. (4) In preface of the constitution, they have expressed the history of Twipra Kingdom. On the other hand they have criticized the rule of Govt. of India about the enactment of the Armed Forces Special Power Act 1958, Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) (TADA) Act and the National Security Act (NSA). (5) In the constitution they have incorporated 7 point aims and objects of the 'National Liberation Front of Twipra'. Some of aims and objectives as mentioned in their illegal constitution are given below: The immediate object of the party is to overthrow imperialism, capitalism and neocolonialism from the country with armed struggle for distinct and independent identity of the Borok civilization of Twipra. The liberate borok land Twipra complete Freedom and transform a People's Republic Government with a view to establish the truth, Justice, liberty, Equality and Fraternity in the state. To create funds for the welfare of the masses, especially for the emancipation from poverty of the country. Above mentioned aims and objectives reveal the below noted criminal activities of NLFT extremists against the State. i) Promoting enmity between the classes of people of Tripura ii) Imputation, assertion, prejudicial to National Integration iii) Criminal conspiracy of NLFT iv) Conspiring to commit waging or attempting to wage war or abetting waging of work against Govt. of India. (6) The NLFT members were involved in all kidnapping/abduction matters with regard to realization of ransom as well as extortion of money in the form of so-called collection of tax from innocent people and contractors etc. engaged in the developmental works including construction of border fencing and border road in Tripura and also involved in other criminal activities as mentioned in the FIR. (7) On 31st March, 1998, the NLFT Extremists killed one Minister of Tripura, viz. engaged in the developmental works including construction of border fencing and border road in Tripura and also involved in other criminal activities as mentioned in the FIR. (7) On 31st March, 1998, the NLFT Extremists killed one Minister of Tripura, viz. Bimal Sinha at Abhanga under Salema P.S. Besides this, NLFT Extremist committed various mass killings of innocent people as well Security Forces in Tripura State in past years. (8) At the time of arrest of accused Utpal Debbarma, articles like SIM Cards, Memory Cards, Pen Drive, Mobile Phones, Debit Cart, Identity Cards in different names have been seized from his possession. All these have provided vital information about the banned NLFT organization as well as activities-of Utpal Debbarma as an active member of NLFT extremists' outfit before his arrest. This refers to seizure list dated 12.07.2011 in connection with the instant case. (9) Print out copies of information stored in some seized SIM Cards, Memory Cards, Pen Drive etc. (which were recovered from the possession of arrested accused Utpal Debbarma) prove the dealings of Utpal Debbarma with arms and extortion matters of the banned NLFT outfit. (10) Phone numbers as found in the possession of Utpal Debbarma proves beyond doubt his nefarious activities like collection of extortion money from contractors engaged in Govt. construction works at extremist prone areas dominated by NLFT. Witnesses (Contractors) have confirmed that the accused Utpal Debbarma used to keep constant pressure on them (victims) by way of threatening them with dire consequence for foiling in payment of huge amounts in favour of the NLFT. (11) The witnesses in the case have also stated that in couple of occasions the outfit members destroyed valuable construction related vehicles/equipments and heavy machineries due to non-payment of extortion money as demanded by them. Ganganagar P.S. Case No. 09/2010 has been registered on one of such incidents. (12) Arrested Utpal Debbarma has been charge sheeted in connection with Kanchanpur P.S. Case No. 78/2009 under Section 148/149/302/326 IPC/27 of Arms Act and 10/ 13 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and Ganganagar P.S. Case No. 09/2010 under Section 435 of IPC and Birgang P.S. Case No. 23/2001 under Section 120(B)/ 121/ 124(A) IPC and 10/ 13 ULP Act showing him absconder. His involvement in Kanchanpur P.S. Case No. 12/2011 under Section 148/ 149/ 302/ 307 IPC and 27 of Arms Ad is also transpired which is still under investigation. His involvement in Kanchanpur P.S. Case No. 12/2011 under Section 148/ 149/ 302/ 307 IPC and 27 of Arms Ad is also transpired which is still under investigation. (13) Nefarious activities of the accused Utpal Debbarma caused threats to the National Unity and Integrity and safety and security of the peace loving people of the State of Tripura as well as India. (14) Shri Utpal Debbarma having his assumed named viz. Umthai @ Kerang @ Bulldog is a self-styled Foreign and Finance Secretary of the banned outfit, NLFT. He established his link with NLFT in the year 1996 and finally joined the NLFT outfit in 1999. (15) Since long Utpal Debbarma was underground as a member of NLFT, the banned outfit and hence the SDM, Khowai has deleted his name from the voter list which was published on 30.10.10 and 10.11.08. The member of Panchayat of West Rajnagar has also corroborated that he has been absent from his house for a long period. This refers to seizure list dated 17.08.11 in the instant case. (16) During Police remand period, accused Utpal Debbarma confessed that he was an active member of NLFT (BM) outfit. He finally joined in NLFT (BM) in 1999. For long period he spent in the NLFT (BM) hideout/camps in Bangladesh. He identified all the hideouts/ camps of NLFT extremists' outfit through Geo-Spatial Internet Channel after having arranged it in interrogation cell of Special Branch, Agartala in presence of witnesses. Leading to his confessional statement/identification, pictures of NLFT (BM) hideouts/camps have been printed out and seized printout of pictures in presence of witnesses and took into custody in connection with the instant case. (17) Above process of identification of hideouts/camps in the Geo-spatial internet by accused Utpal Debbarma and print out of pictures of hideout/camps of NLFT (BM) located in Bangladesh has been recorded in video camera by ASI Babul Deb (CID) as per direction. Later on photographer Babul Deb of CID captured the whole process in a CD and handed over for interest of the case. This refers to seizure list dated 24.07.11 and 16.08.11 in the instant case. (18) Accused Utpal Debbarma is a listed NLFT extremist maintained at Special Branch Agartala. Later on photographer Babul Deb of CID captured the whole process in a CD and handed over for interest of the case. This refers to seizure list dated 24.07.11 and 16.08.11 in the instant case. (18) Accused Utpal Debbarma is a listed NLFT extremist maintained at Special Branch Agartala. As per list of SP (SB) Tripura, Utpal Debbarma Umthai @ Wuampuri @ Angthai @ Waythai Barak Buldog, S/o. Bahadhur Debbarma of Ramdewan Chowdhury Para (Rajnagar) P.S. Champahawar is a listed extremist as mentioned against Sl. No. 18/2010 (main) under Champahawar P.S. jurisdiction. The list has been taken up with proper seal cover in presence or witnesses and took into custody. This refers to the seizure list dated 21.07.11 in the instant case. (19) The information extracted from the seized SIM card, mobile phone by the CID officer having knowledge about computer, relating to huge mobile numbers with names of contractors corroborates with the statements on examination of relevant personnel pertaining to the collection of extortion money by the NLFT extremist putting pressure and threat upon the victim witnesses. (20) Having processed the seized Pen drive, photographs of armed rebels at various places (which reveals anti-national activities) list of senior extremist cadres, notification of promotion to the next self-styled post, document of national council of NDFD, document of recognition of NDFD, blank 'Oath Form', photographs of extremists in different body language, documents on Kungfu, details of various arms including their outline handling mechanism, documents under the head of Guerrilla warfare etc. have been printed out and seized in presence of witnesses. This refer seizure list dated 19.07.11 in the instant case. (21) Having processed the another seized Pen drive by CID officer having knowledge about computer, total 7(seven) sheets having information of various companies of border fencing works, road construction (Viz, Bangal Nirman, NEECO, Costal Project Pvt. Ltd., HSLC), travel agency, PWD etc. with names and phone numbers etc. have been printed out using computer and seized in presence of witnesses. During examination of relevant witnesses of above information of pen drive, it has been confirmed that accused NLFT extremist Utpal Debbarma called them several tunes over mobile phone for paying extortion money to the NLFT outfit and he arranged collection of extortion money after being paid by them (relevant witnesses). This refers seizure list dated 19.07.2011 in the case. During examination of relevant witnesses of above information of pen drive, it has been confirmed that accused NLFT extremist Utpal Debbarma called them several tunes over mobile phone for paying extortion money to the NLFT outfit and he arranged collection of extortion money after being paid by them (relevant witnesses). This refers seizure list dated 19.07.2011 in the case. As per sanction order in exercise of power conferred by Section 196 CrPC, Sri Saradindu Choudhury, Deputy Secretary (Home), Govt. of Tripura, has accorded sanction to prosecute the petitioner under Section- 153(A)/ 153(B)/ 121(A)/ 122 IPC along with other offence as noted in a Court of competent jurisdiction. This refer sanction order no. F. No. 23(8)-PD/2011 Dtd. 28.09.11. As per sanction order in exercise of power conferred by Section 17 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967, read with Govt. of India Notification No. S.01164(E) Dtd. 03.04.04 Sri S.K. Panda, Chief Secretary of Govt. of Tripura, accorded sanction to prosecute the petitioner under Section- 10/ 13 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 along with other offence as noted in a Court of competent jurisdiction. This refers to the sanction order No. F. No. 23(8)-PD/2011 Dtd. 28.09.11. Prima-facial case thus has been established against arrested accused Utpal Debbarma (33) @ Umthai @ Kereng S/O. Lt. Bahadur Debbarma of Ramdewan Chowdhury Para (Rajnagar) PS-Champahawar West Tripura U/S- 153(A)/ 153(B)/ 121(A)/ 122/ 120(B) IPC and 10/ 13 Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 in connection with the instant case. 4. The column 11 of the final form as submitted under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. contains the details of seizure as relied by the police. Apart that, while 26, Assam Rifles, Aizawl handed over the petitioner, the said Deputy Superintendent of Police (CID), on preparing 13 seizure lists, seized 101 materials which are also part of the catalogue of the seized materials. 5. Mr. S. Deb, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the materials as allegedly seized from the petitioner cannot be stated to associate the petitioner with the allegations. He referred to the materials so seized at Sl. Nos. 47, 49, 51, 52, 54, 56, 85, 86, 89, 96, 97, 98 and 99. This Court without giving a detailed list of those materials may pick up a few of them for purpose of appreciation. (a) The seized material (the list of the proclaimed hardcore extremists/collaborator) shows the petitioner at Sl. Nos. 47, 49, 51, 52, 54, 56, 85, 86, 89, 96, 97, 98 and 99. This Court without giving a detailed list of those materials may pick up a few of them for purpose of appreciation. (a) The seized material (the list of the proclaimed hardcore extremists/collaborator) shows the petitioner at Sl. 8 as a proclaimed hardcore extremist/collaborator. (b) From the seized materials it transpire that the petitioner, Utpal Debbarma, is also known as: Umthai @ Watai Boro @ Onthai @ Kereng, S/O. Late Bahadur Debbarma of Choukidar Howar Para (Tulasikhar), P.S.-Champahawar, (c) NLFT (BM) camps as shown by the petitioner by way of the Geo-Spatial Internet are located in various parts of the neighbouring countries, (d) One letter of the petitioner shows demand for illegal subscriptions and (e) One detailed report reflects on the project 'CONGO' as submitted by the petitioner as the Secretary to the Department of Defence, NLFT on 24.03.2008. 6. Mr. Deb, learned senior counsel submitted that when the First Information Report was lodged, the petitioner was prosecuting his studies in Mechanical Engineering in the Tripura Engineering College, but he was not arrested in connection with the said case. All on a sudden, without any materials he has been shown arrested in the said East Agartala P.S. Case. The petitioner is languishing in the jail since 11.07.2011 and this incarceration has been curtailing the personal liberty of the petitioner. On all occasions, his prayers for bail were rejected. Mr. Deb further submitted that the police has framed the petitioner in the case without any tenable materials. Ultimately, Mr. Deb submitted that after going though the supplementary charge-sheet or "the part charge-sheet No. 180", no incriminating and tenable materials would surface against the petitioner. Moreover, under any condition the petitioner be enlarged on bail and if the petitioner is enlarged on bail the trial would not be affected in any manner as the investigation has come to its finality. Mr. Deb, learned senior counsel has also made a reference to a decision of the Apex Court in State of Kerala Vs. Raneef, as reported in (2011) 1 SCC 784 , where the Apex Court held as follows: 15. In deciding bail applications an important factor which should certainly be taken into consideration by the Court is the delay in concluding the trial. Raneef, as reported in (2011) 1 SCC 784 , where the Apex Court held as follows: 15. In deciding bail applications an important factor which should certainly be taken into consideration by the Court is the delay in concluding the trial. Often this takes several years, and if the accused is denied bail but is ultimately acquitted, who will restore so many years of his life spent in custody? Is Article 21 of the Constitution, which is the most basic of all the fundamental rights in our Constitution, not violated in such a case? Of course this is not the only factor, but it is certainly one of the important factors in deciding whether to grant bail. 7. Raneef (supra) is celebrated as a pioneering case in our country for enlarging an accused charged with the guilt by association on bail. In Raneef (supra), Scales Vs. United States, as reported in 367 US 203 (1960) has been referred, where Harlan, J. of the US Supreme Court while dealing with the membership clause in the McCarran Act, 1950 distinguished between active "knowing" membership and passive, merely nominal membership in a subversive organization, and observed: The clause does not make criminal all association with an organization which has been shown to engage in illegal activity. A person may be foolish, deluded, or perhaps mere optimistic, but he is not by this statute made a criminal. There must be clear proof that the defendant specifically intends to accomplish the aims of the organization by resort to violence. 8. In Elfbrandt. v. Russel, as reported in 384 US 11 (1965), Douglas, J. of the US Supreme Court speaking for the majority observed: Those who join an organization but do not share its unlawful purpose and who do not participate in its unlawful activities surely pose no treat, either as citizens or as public employees.... A law which applies to membership without the 'Specific intent' to further the illegal aims of the organization infringes unnecessarily on protected freedoms. It rests on the doctrine of 'guilt by association' which has no place here. 9. In Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee Vs. McGrath, as reported in 341 US 123 (1950), Douglas, J. further elaborated the development in understanding of law in the backdrop of the greater tension. It rests on the doctrine of 'guilt by association' which has no place here. 9. In Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee Vs. McGrath, as reported in 341 US 123 (1950), Douglas, J. further elaborated the development in understanding of law in the backdrop of the greater tension. A part of his observation is reproduced hereunder: In days of great tension when feelings run high, it is a temptation to take shortcuts by borrowing from the totalitarian techniques of our opponents. But when we do, we set in motion a subversive influence of our own design that destroys us from within. 10. In Raneef (supra), a Doctor was incarcerated for a long period only for allegation of stitching wound of a terrorist. The case at hand is gulf apart in terms of the factual matrix of Raneef (supra). 11. Before an exercise is taken for scrutinising the materials that has been collected by the police and have been made part of the final form (the charge-sheet), gainfully some words from Clarence Brandenburg Vs. State of Ohio, as reported in 395 US 444 (1969)may be extracted: The U.S. Supreme Court went further and held that mere "advocacy or teaching the duty, necessity, or propriety" of violence as a means of accomplishing political or industrial reform, or publishing or circulating or displaying any book or paper containing such advocacy, or justifying the commission of violent acts with intent to exemplify, spread or advocate the propriety of the doctrines of criminal syndicalism, or to voluntarily assemble with a group formed "to teach or advocate the doctrines of criminal syndicalism" is not per se illegal. It will become illegal only if it incites to imminent lawless action. The statute under challenge was hence held to be unconstitutional being violative of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. 12. This being the basic principle to understand the prima facie materials, we cannot be oblivious that the Apex Court in Arup Bhuyan Vs. State of Assam, as reported in 2011 (3) GLT (SC) 1, as followed by this Court in M. Londhoni Devi Vs. 12. This being the basic principle to understand the prima facie materials, we cannot be oblivious that the Apex Court in Arup Bhuyan Vs. State of Assam, as reported in 2011 (3) GLT (SC) 1, as followed by this Court in M. Londhoni Devi Vs. National Investigation Agency, as reported in 2011 (3) GL T 805, sounded alert against the abuse of the provisions of special statutes for combating unlawful activities or terrorist acts in this country stating that when there is hardly any material or even some materials relating to the passive collaboration or association with the banned outfit then the Court should not hesitate to consider the bail following the usual parameters, but when materials are available to the extent that the accused has been participating or attempted to waging war against the State and actively involved in achieving the secessionist object of the banned outfit, the Court shall not demolish the legislative intent by way of constructing the special statutes like Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act or the special provisions devised for combating the sinister designs against the State. 13. In the case in hand, the petitioner has been alleged of waging, or attempting to wage war, or abetting waging of war, against the State, collecting arms etc. with intention of waging war against the State for achieving the secessionist object of promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of community and doing acts prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony etc. This Court, after cautious scrutiny of the records, finds materials strongly indicating the petitioner as one of the masterminds behind perusing a well-knit war strategy against the state. 14. From the statement of one Baidya Singh Jamatia, a former NLFT rebel, it transpires that the petitioner, complying the direction of the President of the banned outfit, drew up a plan for a protracted war for 'an independent state', for garnering the support from within, for eviction of non-tribal people from the ADC area, for realising 'tax' from the Government and ultimately for declaring or restoring the independent state 'Twipra' by way of declaring war against the Government of India. Active participation of the petitioner in extortion has been prima facie revealed from the statements of the reputed businessmen and traders of the State. Active participation of the petitioner in extortion has been prima facie revealed from the statements of the reputed businessmen and traders of the State. The mobile phone as used by the petitioner for extorting 'tax' from the reputed businessmen and traders of the State has been seized from the petitioner. One of the cited witness, namely Haitya Kumar Tripura, stated that the petitioner was the Secretary to the Foreign Department of the banned outfit and he was also in-charge of the Finance Department. Above all, he was in-charge of purchasing the arms and ammunition for the banned outfit called 'NLFT'. Another cited witness namely, Bharat Joy Reang stated to the investigators that the petitioner was the person who was coordinating among the various insurgent outfits of the North-East India which are having the similar aims and object of waging or attempting to wage war against the state. The petitioner, for some time had operated from Shillong for extortion and collection of funds for the banned outfit. A host of the cited witnesses categorically provided the telephone numbers of the petitioner as used for purpose of extortion. Such incriminating materials are in galore in the final form (the charge-sheet). 15. No doubt, those materials have to survive the strict legal scrutiny. This Court therefore, refrains from making any further comment, but on the face of such materials, enlarging the petitioner on bail may turn highly prejudicial for trial. 16. In view of this, the prayer for bail stands rejected. 17. It is to be ensured by the trial Court that the trial is drawn to its finality as expeditiously as possible. In case of necessity, the trial be split up. It is to be remembered that speedy trial is a right for the under-trial persons (UTPs) and the speedy trial averts the fallout as highlighted by the Supreme Court in Raneef (supra). Send down the LCRs forthwith by a Special Messenger. Petition dismissed