JUDGMENT 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking bail in connection with FIR Case No.09(05)2022 under Section 17/18/20 of UA(P) Act on the file of WKG Police Station. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 22.5.2022, Shri N.Dilip Singh, Head Constable, CDO Unit Kakching reported that he received a reliable information about the presence of valley based underground members at Elangkhangpokpi area. On receiving information, a team of CDO unit under the command of Inspector Shri Abash Khan and under the supervision of Additional Superintendent of Police Shri Binoy Chongtham and overall supervision of the Superintendent of Police, Kakching Shri Shrey Vats rushed to the area and conducted search at suspected areas. During search, one person was detained for verification at Yangdong. On verification, he identified himself as Elangbam Rabi Singh (petitioner herein), who is an active cadre of UNLF. He also stated that he joined the banned organisation through one Erei while he was working at Moreh in January, 2022 and he was tasked to carry out extortion for the banned organisation in Kakching District. He further disclosed that he met one Meiraba of Chajing Khunou, Sugnu, in the month of April, 2022 at Yangdong and that Meiraba was also tasked to carry out extortion along with him. Immediately, he was arrested at 9.40 p.m. and on body search, one Redmi Ye mobile phone with IMEI 1:868559042049110 and IMEI 2: 868559042049128 was found and the same was seized after observing formalities. 3. Further case of the prosecution is that immediately the team rushed to Chajing Khunou area and cordoned off the area. During the said operation, one person was detained and on verification, he was identified as Mutum Meriraba and on further verification, the said person disclosed that he joined the party through one Munaidraba, presently staying in Myanmar and a member of UNLF during the month of March, 2022. He stated that he was in regular contact with Munaidraba through Whatsapp and was tasked to collect the contact numbers of businessman in Kakching District area and in Imphal area also. He stated that he was in regular contact with Munaidraba through Whatsapp and was tasked to collect the contact numbers of businessman in Kakching District area and in Imphal area also. He further stated that he along with the petitioner (Rabi) were to collect extortion money from the businessmen in Sugnu area and after collection of extortion money, Meiraba was to send the same to the bank accounts, which were to be informed later using his current bank account at Axis Bank, Kakching. The team also arrested Meiraba at 11.00 p.m. and seized (1) One plus mobile phone with IMEI 1: 865300040232017 and IMEI 2: 865300040232009; (2) One POCO mobile phone with IMEI 1: 868842056298470 and IMEI 2: 868842056298488; (3) One ASUS Laptop silver in colour. Thereafter, the arrested persons along with the seized articles were handed over for taking further action. 4. Opposing the bail application, the respondent State filed affidavit-in-opposition. 5. Mr. S. Jibon, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and that he is a simple mason and he never committed any terrorist acts as alleged by the prosecution. He would submit that at the time of arrest and during the period of investigation, no incriminating article were recovered from his possession and also from any place to make out prima facie case against the petitioner. Further, nobody was examined to corroborate and to make out the report of the informant of the present FIR Case. 6. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner was arrested on 22.5.2022 and from 22.5.2022, he was in judicial custody and that earlier, the petitioner has filed bail application before the Sessions Judge, Thoubal in Cril. Misc. (B) Case No.109 of 2022. By the order dated 10.6.2022, the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the bail application without consideration of the innocence of the petitioner and also without consideration and analyse of the landmark judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court. Thus, a prayer is made to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 7. Per contra, Mr. H. Samarjit, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that during the course of investigation, the investigating officer examined the complainant and his police team one after another and recorded their statements in writing. Their statements corroborated each other and the team had also seized some important articles from the possession of the petitioner. 7. Per contra, Mr. H. Samarjit, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that during the course of investigation, the investigating officer examined the complainant and his police team one after another and recorded their statements in writing. Their statements corroborated each other and the team had also seized some important articles from the possession of the petitioner. He would submit that from the examination of the seized mobile phones, it is established that the accused persons have frequent contact with their leader namely Erei @ Mutnaidaba and also established that they had contact with the senior cadres of UNLF and given tasks to collect money. 8. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submitted that on interrogation the petitioner admitted that he is a close associate of Erei @ Mutnaidaba since October, 2019 and he had visited him at Namphalong, Myanmar and he lastly visited UNLF camp at Namphalong on 16.5.2022. There, he was assigned to contact accused Mutum Meiraba and collect fund from Saw Mill owners of Kakching District. Thus, a prayer is made to dismiss the bail application. 9. This Court considered the rival submissions and also perused materials available on record. 10. According to the petitioner, he was a mason by profession and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. According to the petitioner, on 22.5.2022 at about 4.00 p.m., he was arrested by a team of CDO Unit under the command of the Inspector from his house without issuing any arrest memo on the false charge that he is an active cadre of the banned organization UNLF and he has been tasked to carry out extortion for the said organisation in Kakching District mainly in Sugnu area. 11. The prosecution has vehemently argued that the petitioner is having frequent contact with his leader Erei @ Mutnaidaba and also a member of terrorist organisation of UNLF and is working for collection of fund, extortion activity for the outfit. 12. It appears that earlier the petitioner has filed bail application in Crl. Misc (B) Case No.109 of 2022 before the learned Sessions Judge, Thoubal and by the order dated 10.6.2022, the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the bail application. The order dated 10.6.2022 reads thus: 'CDs placed before me. Perused the same. Ld. Addl. 12. It appears that earlier the petitioner has filed bail application in Crl. Misc (B) Case No.109 of 2022 before the learned Sessions Judge, Thoubal and by the order dated 10.6.2022, the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the bail application. The order dated 10.6.2022 reads thus: 'CDs placed before me. Perused the same. Ld. Addl. PP for the State submitted that the accused is prima facie involved in the present case by raising funds for the said outfit and prayed for rejecting the bail application. Ld. Counsel for the accused submitted that the accused has been falsely implicated in the present case and that he is a simple mason and that he never committed any terrorist acts. He prayed for releasing the accused on bail by imposing conditions. I have perused and considered the relevant materials on record in the light of the submission made and I am of the view that there are sufficient materials to show that the accused has been involved in raising funds for the banned outfit. Hence, bail is denied.' 13. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Sessions Judge has wrongly rejected the bail application of the petitioner without consideration of his innocence and also without consideration of the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court. 14. On a reading of the order of the learned Sessions Judge, this Court finds that taking note of the seriousness of the offence and also considering the prima facie case established by the prosecution through CDs, the learned Sessions Judge rightly rejected the bail application of the petitioner. This Court finds no error in the order of learned Single Judge in refusing to grant bail. 15. When this Court examined the materials produced by the prosecution, prima facie, the same reveal that the petitioner being a member of terrorist organisation of UNLF and is actively working in collection of fund, extortion activity for the outfit. The prosecution also prima facie proved the charge against the petitioner for commission of the offence punishable under Section 17/18/20 of UA(P) Act. Furthermore, the investigation is at initial stage and the prosecution has to collect some more important materials and has to examine more witnesses to substantiate the charge against the accused. Therefore, releasing the petitioner at this stage of investigation will hamper in the further investigation of the case. Furthermore, the investigation is at initial stage and the prosecution has to collect some more important materials and has to examine more witnesses to substantiate the charge against the accused. Therefore, releasing the petitioner at this stage of investigation will hamper in the further investigation of the case. Thus, prayer of the petitioner for grant of bail has no legs. That apart, there is no merit in seeking bail. As to whether the petitioner is an active member of the banned organisation or not can be decided only at the time of trial. At this stage, the innocence pleaded by the petitioner cannot be accepted. Further, the offence alleged against the petitioner and another is serious in nature. Therefore, the bail application is liable to be dismissed. 16. In the result, the bail application is dismissed. No costs.