Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Supplying Arms To ISIS-Linked Terror Module After 7.5 Years In Jail

The Delhi High Court has granted bail to a man accused of helping an alleged ISIS-linked terror module to procure weapons, observing that he has remained in custody for over seven-and-a-half years and there was no possibility of the trial concluding in the near future.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Ravinder Dudeja allowed the plea filed by one Naim challenging the trial court's order rejecting his bail plea in a case registered by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), the Indian Penal Code and the Explosive Substances Act.

The Court noted that only 42 out of 112 witnesses were examined in the trial, despite Naim having been in custody since January 2019.

“Given the nature of the evidence and the delay in conclusion of the trial, we are of the opinion that the appellant has been able to make out a case for being released on bail,” the Court observed.

The NIA alleged that Naim was instrumental in arranging weapons and ammunition for a group allegedly involved in a conspiracy to carry out terrorist activities.

According to the prosecution, Naim facilitated the procurement of weapons from arms dealers in Meerut and introduced the main accused, Mufti Mohd. Suhail, to them.

The prosecution alleged that Naim facilitated two transactions in July and August 2018, involving the supply of country-made pistols, a katta and ammunition. It further claimed that he knew the weapons would be used to target civilians and spread terror.

Opposing the bail plea, the NIA argued that Naim was an active member of the alleged conspiracy and could not claim innocence merely because his role differed from that of the other accused.

It also relied on call detail records (CDRs), which allegedly established that Naim and the other accused had travelled together.

Naim's counsel, however, argued that he had been in custody for more than seven years and eight months and that the trial was unlikely to conclude anytime soon. It was also submitted that no incriminating material, apart from two mobile phones, had been recovered from him.

After examining the material on record, the Court observed that the statements of the three witnesses, who had already been examined during the trial, did not persuade it to deny bail to Naim.

It added that their examination had also reduced, if not eliminated, the possibility of the appellant influencing the trial.

The Court further observed that although the prosecution was right in contending that Naim's alleged role in the conspiracy could not be viewed in isolation, it would still have to establish that he acted in furtherance of a common intention and had knowledge of the conspiracy's common goal.

“In the present appeal as well, though the appellant has been in custody since 03.01.2019, that is, for a period of more than 7 ½ years, in the trial only 42 witnesses out of 112 have been examined. There is no possibility of the trial concluding any time soon,” the Court said.

“Given the nature of the evidence and the delay in conclusion of the trial, we are of the opinion that the appellant has been able to make out a case for being released on bail,” it added.

Granting bail, the Bench directed Naim to furnish a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of the same amount.

The Court clarified that its observations were confined to the consideration of bail and should not be construed as findings on the merits of the case.