The High Court sought a comprehensive report from the Special Sessions Judge, NIA/ATS, Lucknow, questioning why its earlier directions to conclude the trial expeditiously and to ensure the proper conduct of the witness examination had not been complied with.

A Bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra passed the direction while hearing the 3^rd bail appeal of Ansad Badruddin and Firoz Khan, who were arrested in February 2021 by the UP Police's Anti-Terrorist Squad (ATS) in connection with a UAPA case.

The applicants submitted that in its December 7, 2022 order, the High Court had directed the trial court to conclude the trial preferably within one year.

Furthermore, in a subsequent order passed on January 24, 2024, the HC directed that prosecution witnesses be examined and cross-examined in accordance with Section 138 of the Evidence Act, while ensuring the expeditious conclusion of the proceedings.

Despite this, the applicants submitted that the trial is progressing very slowly, and that even the cross-examination of the informant in the FIR has not been completed, although some formal witnesses have already been examined.

Perusing the order sheets placed before it, the Bench observed that despite some coercive steps having been taken by the court concerned and despite an opportunity having been given to the prosecution to cross-examine the PW-2, the cross-examination remained incomplete.

The appellants further pointed out that there are 18 prosecution witnesses and, in these circumstances, there was little possibility of the trial concluding in the near future.

The State, on the other hand, referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Gulfisha Fatima versus State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 1, to argue that since the present appellants are in jail pursuant to the Special Act, the rigor of Section 43D(5) does not permit the accused appellant to get bail even if the trial is being delayed.

Against the backdrop of these submissions, the bench observed that it was 'surprised' to notice that the Special NIA Court had not shown its proper indulgence to abide by the directions of this Court.

“Prima facie, it is clear that there is no progress in the trial and in the absence of non-progress of the trial, the fundamental right of the accused persons under Article 21 of the Constitution of India may be protected...", the bench remarked.

Accordingly, the Court directed the Special Sessions Judge, NIA/ATS, Lucknow to submit a comprehensive report explaining why the trial had not been concluded in terms of the High Court's orders.

The matter has been listed on August 10, 2026.

Background

Essentially, both the accused (Ansad Badruddin and Firoz Khan) were arrested on February 16, 2021, by the Anti-Terror Squad after receiving a piece of information that members of the PFI (accused) were to meet in order to commit the murder of people and Office Holders of Hindu Religious Organizations and for creating fear and terror in the Society and to commit blast in different programs of Hindu Religion.

At the time of their arrest, allegedly one pistol 32 bore, 6 live cartridges, 9 rods of high-quality explosives, 2 Explosive ER FO Devices with battery etc were recovered along with a diary written in Malayalam language, wherein they had disclosed their aim, object, and ideology.

The prosecution has further alleged that in that diary, words lil "attack", "burning", "US", "Ram Mandir" like words were mentioned in code words. Further the words "defense", "enemy know everything", "we should prepare", "Muslims are strong", "the root of coming our area leader", "conspiracy" like words were also written.

Consequently, an FIR was lodged against them after a thorough investigation in the matter, and a chargesheet against them was also filed for the offence under Sections 120-B, 121-A I.P.C., Sections 13, 16, 18, 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, Sections 3/4/5 of the Explosive Substance Act, 1908 and Sections 3/25 Arms Act, 1959.

The state also submitted that the appellants had admitted that they are active members of PFI and their aim and object is of giving training to the people for fighting against Hindu religious organizations and to promote the ideology of PFI.

Advocate Amarjeet Singh Rakhra appeared for the appellants

Case title - Ansad Badruddin And Another vs Anti Terrorist Squad Thru. Its Adg/Sp

Click Here To Read/Download Order