J&K&L High Court Grants Bail To Woman Under UAPA, Says Mere Custody Of Husband's Cash Without Knowledge Or Intent Can't Imply Terror Link

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court granted bail to a woman accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), holding that mere custody of cash at the instance of her husband, without material showing intention or knowledge to further terrorist activities, is insufficient to attract offences under Sections 38 and 40 of the Act.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar held that apart from being the wife of the co-accused and having been entrusted with cash for safe custody, there was no material to show her association with any proscribed organisation, handler, or any overt act indicative of intention to further terrorist activities.

The appellant was charged under Sections 13, 38 and 40 of the UAPA and had been in custody since 15.09.2022. The prosecution case was that ₹21.81 lakhs were recovered from her parental house at her disclosure. The amount was alleged to be part of a larger consignment received by her husband from a Pakistan-based handler.

However, the Court noted that a careful reading of the charge-sheet revealed no material indicating that the appellant had any direct nexus with the handler or prior knowledge about the dropping or receipt of the consignment.

All communications and instructions were stated to have been exchanged exclusively between the co-accused (her husband) and the handler.

It was also not disputed that the appellant had been married to the co-accused barely a month prior to her arrest. The disclosure attributed to her only indicated that she had kept the cash, allegedly handed over by her husband for safe custody, at her parental house.

Referring to the law laid down in Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali, the Bench reiterated that at the stage of bail under UAPA, the Court must assess whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusations are prima facie true.

The Court also relied on K. A. Najeeb, which recognised that prolonged incarceration and delay in trial are relevant considerations in appropriate cases. It further noted the principles laid down in Thwaha Fasal, clarifying that mere association or passive support is insufficient to attract offences under Sections 38 and 39 of the UAPA unless accompanied by intention to further terrorist activities.

The court said there was also no allegation that she provided shelter, food, or logistical assistance to any militant.

Observing that the appellant had been in custody since September 2022 and that twelve witnesses had already been examined, the Court held that continued incarceration, in the absence of strong prima facie material, would not serve the ends of justice.

The Bench noted that no material had been placed on record to suggest that her release would lead to tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed and the appellant was granted bail subject to furnishing a personal bond of ₹1,00,000 with two sureties, appearance before the Trial Court on each date of hearing, and restriction on leaving the Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir without prior permission.

Case-Title: Shabnam Akhter vs UT of J&K, 2026

Click Here To Read/Download Order