*Section 16(1)(a)

Raju: this order taking cognisance has not been challenged. See 43D(5) of UAPA Act, independently also I will also show the offence has taken place. If section 16 offence has been committed, they are not entitled to bail.

accusation is prima facie true [is the threshold] and since order of cognisance is not challenged, they are not entitled. Anyway, in umar khalid's case, the court has held that section 43D(5) is applicable and therefore, not entitled to bail.