The Delhi High Court has granted bail to an accused in a case registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, noting that he has remained in custody for nearly eight years and that the trial is unlikely to conclude anytime soon.

The Division Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja was dealing with the appeal filed by Mohammed Saqib against rejection of his bail plea by the trial court.

The case was registered for the offences under Sections 120B, 121, 121A and 122 of the Indian Penal Code, as well as various provisions of the UAPA and Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act.

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) alleged that Saqib was associated with the group Harkat-ul-Harb-E-Islam and was involved in facilitating procurement of weapons for Kashmiri militants. He was taken into custody on December 26, 2018.

Granting bail to him, the Court noted that out of 120 witnesses cited by the NIA, only 40 had been examined.

Even though the NIA had informed the Court that it would drop 39 witnesses, the Bench said that even after taking that into account, the Court observed that the trial was “not likely to end any time soon.”

The Court reiterated the principle that while the statutory restrictions must be considered, their rigour may “melt down” where there is no likelihood of the trial being completed within a reasonable time and the period of incarceration has already become substantial.

Reliance was placed on Khuram Parvez v. National Investigation Agency, where it was held that statutory restrictions under Section 43D(5) do not completely oust the jurisdiction of constitutional courts to grant bail where continued incarceration raises concerns under Part III of the Constitution of India.

Furthermore, the Bench noted that the three prime witnesses concerning Saqib's alleged visits to Kashmir had already been examined before the Trial Court.

After perusing their statements, the Court said it found “no reason to deny bail” to Saqib on the basis of their imputations against him.

The Court also noted that it was refraining from undertaking a detailed analysis of the evidence so as not to prejudice the trial. It observed that prima facie, the statements of the witnesses were not grave enough to prolong Saqib's detention.

As regards the electronic evidence, the Court observed that although the chats allegedly recovered from Saqib's phone were “grave in nature”, they did not warrant denial of bail given the long period of incarceration pending trial.

As such, the Bench granted bail to him on strict conditions, including surrender of his passport, and a direction that he cannot leave his native District except for attending trial in Delhi or reporting to the NIA office.

It also restricted Saqib from circulating anti-national material on social media.

Appearance: Mr.Sarim Naved, Adv. for Appellant; Mr.Rahul Tyagi, SPP with Ms.Priya Rai, Mr.Avinash Kumar Singh, Mr.Priyansh Raj Singh and Mr.Amit Rohila, Advs. DSP Abhinav Kajla, CIO and Insp. Lalit Sharma, AIO, NIA

Case title: Mohammad Saqib@ Saqib Iftekar v. NIA

Case no.: CRL.A. 676/2024

Click here to read order