26/11 Mumbai Terror Attack: High Court Refuses Police Clearance Certificate To Acquitted Accused Fahim Ansari, Cites Security Concerns

The Bombay High Court on Wednesday dismissed the petition filed by Fahim Ansari, the lone accused in the 26/11 Mumbai Terror Attack Case who was acquitted from the trial, seeking a direction to the Maharashtra Police to issue him the mandatory Police Clearance Certificate (PCC) so that he can earn a livelihood by plying an autorickshaw.

A division bench of Justice Ajay Gadkari and Justice Ranjitsinha Bhonsale pronounced the judgment saying, "Considering the facts of the case and also the security reasons highlighted by the authorities, we are of the opinion that the authorities have rightly refused the PCC to the petitioner. In view thereof, petition is dismissed,"

A detailed copy of the judgment is yet to be made available. 

Notably, Ansari had moved the High Court in February last year, urging the court to protect his 'right to livelihood' and direct the State Police to issue him a PCC so that he can earn his livelihood by plying an autorickshaw. However, the Maharashtra Government through Public Prosecutor Mankunwar Deshmukh had told the bench in November 2025 that he was free to take up any employment that does not mandate a police clearance certificate

It would not be out of place to mention that Fahim is the only accused to be acquitted from the 26/11 Terror attacks case. He was charged for preparing maps of Mumbai and handing over the same to 'masterminds' in Pakistan. However, this charge was not accepted by the special court, which on May 6, 2010, acquitted him from the case. But he faced conviction in another case lodged against him in Lucknow, and in that case, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison.

In his plea, Fahim stated that soon after his release in November 2019, he secured a job at a printing press in Mumbai's Byculla area, which shut down during the Covid-19 pandemic - a period when he worked as a delivery boy. Thereafter, he got a job in a printing press in Mumbra in Thane district. 

But since the income from this job was insufficient for him to look after his family, he applied for a three-wheeler auto-rickshaw license, which he got on January 1, 2024. Thereafter, he applied for the mandatory PCC, which is a must to obtain a Police Service Vehicle (PSV) badge. This badge is mandatory for plying an auto-rickshaw for commercial purposes.

With no response to his multiple enqueries with the concerned police authorities about the status of his PCC plea, Fahim finally filed an application under the Right To Information (RTI) Act only to receive a response on August 13, 2024, wherein the authorities informed him that since he is a member of 'Lashkar-e-Toiba' (LeT), a banned organisation, a PCC could not be provided to him. This, he contended has violated his fundamental rights and the action of the police was 'arbitrary.'

"The petitioner having suffered the full impact of punishment and paying his dues to the society for the offence he committed in the former, is legally entitled to engage in gainful employment, free from any legal blemish or barriers. The fact that the petitioner was tried in the (26/11 attack) case cannot operate as a blanket ban that disentitles him from availing opportunities, especially in the light of the acquittal order passed by the special court and confirmed even by the Supreme Court," his plea stated.

The petition further stated that the police, by denying him a PCC, have deprived him of his fundamental right to livelihood and right to life, guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India. It therefore, seeks a directive to the authorities to issue a PCC to him.

Notably, the petition was initially listed before a division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Dr Neela Gokhale, however, the bench recused itself from hearing the matter.

Case Title: Fahim Arshad Mohammad Yusuf Ansari vs State of Maharashtra