Delhi High Court Denies Bail To Man Booked Under UAPA In J&K Larger Conspiracy Case

The Delhi High Court on Friday dismissed an appeal against the Trial Court order denying bail to Suhail Ahmad Thokar, one of the accused charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA), in connection with the Jammu and Kashmir “larger conspiracy” case post revocation of Article 370 of the Constitution of India.The court observed that several pieces of evidence were procured during the course of investigation that suggested the accused’s significant involvement in the larger conspiracy and in activities related to militancy and terrorism. It further noted that as per the chargesheet filed by NIA, the accused had attempted to arrange shelter for two militants associated with Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), a banned terrorist organization listed in the First Schedule of the UAPA.“Resultantly, after due consideration of the provisions of the UAPA Act, along with an assessment of the material appended in the subject charge-sheet; the collective evidence; as well as surface analysis of its probative value, in our considered view prima facie there exist reasonable grounds to believe that the accusations against the appellant are true. Consequently, the conditions in Section 43 D(5) of the UAPA Act stand satisfied,” the bench of Justices Siddharth Mridul and Anish Dayal said while upholding the trial court order.It was the case of the prosecution that, upon the receipt of intelligence regarding the incubation of a larger conspiracy in the Kashmir valley, the NIA lodged an FIR under various provisions of the UAPA and the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The appellant-accused was consequently arrested on 20.10.2021 and the chargesheet was filed against him and co-accused persons under IPC and UAPA.The chargesheet filed by the NIA revealed that the larger conspiracy was masterminded by high-ranking leaders of various terrorist organizations, including Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), Hizb-ul-Mujahideen (HM), Al-Badr and other entities situated in Pakistan. The chargesheet further alleged that, the conspiracy was conceived subsequent to the revocation of Article 370, with the objective of reigniting acts of terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir as well as in other regions of India.The State claimed that the terrorist groups, in collaboration with their facilitators and leaders based in Pakistan, along with their Over-Ground Workers within India, were involved in influencing and radicalizing susceptible local youth, with the objective to recruit and train them for participating in acts of terrorism. It further alleged that the entire operation was orchestrated under the guidance and support of Pakistan’s Intelligence Agency, i.e., the “Inter-Services Intelligence” (ISI).The chargesheet filed by NIA stated that the appellant played an active role in providing refuge to members of the terrorist organizations and their associates within his domicile, with the aid of his acquaintances.The bail application filed by the appellant was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Special Judge (NIA), Patiala House Courts, after observing that the prosecution had been able to show that there was prima facie evidence to substantiate the case and accusations levelled against the appellant.In the appeal filed against the dismissal of the bail application, the State submitted before the High Court that, in view of Section 43D (5) of the UAPA, at the stage of adjudicating a bail application, the court was only required to see whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against the accused were prima facie true. The State claimed that the allegations against the appellant portray him as an integral member of a collective group of terrorists operating under the direction of terrorist organizations situated in Pakistan. Additionally, the State argued, the appellant actively engaged in facilitating terrorist activities by coordinating and providing logistical support to militants situated in the Kashmir valley.The High Court noted that the evidence gathered by the investigating agency in connection with the “larger conspiracy” case, encompassed evidence in both the physical and the virtual realm.The court further observed that the analysis report of the digital data obtained from the seized mobile phones revealed the presence of images related to deceased militants and terrorist organizations, and that the appellant had acknowledged sharing these images with individuals with the intent of radicalization within the Kashmir Valley.Also, the court noted, the appellant in his disclosure statement had affirmed that he had assisted militants in arranging accommodation in his hometown. Further, the prosecution witness had spoken about the appellant’s affiliation with multiple insurgents and had confirmed his association with insurgents as well as his role in harbouring two militants at his residence, the court observed.The court reiterated that the UAPA requires and warrants active measures against organizations that pose a threat...

Delhi High Court Denies Bail To Man Booked Under UAPA In J&K Larger Conspiracy Case

Parina Katyal

Tags