Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea By Asiya Andrabi's Dukhtaran-E-Millat Challenging UAPA Ban

The Delhi High Court on Thursday dismissed a plea moved by Separatist leader Asiya Andrabi led Dukhtaran-e-Millat (DeM) challenging a notification declaring it as a terrorist organisation under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.The Kashmir-based all-women outfit was banned by the Centre on December 30, 2004 under Section 3 of UAPA. Arrested by the National Investigation Agency in 2018, Andrabi continues to remain in judicial custody.Justice Anish Dayal dismissed the plea after noting that the petitioner organization has a remedy available under UAPA to seek removal of its name from the Schedule, which was not exercised in the matter.“A perusal of the provisions of UAPA show that chapter VI provides for adding a terrorist organization or individuals as part of the Schedule (as per section 35) and section 36 provided that an application may be made to the central government to exercise power under section 35(1)(c) to remove an organization from the Schedule,” the court said. On a query to the counsel appearing for petitioner organization, the court was informed that no such application for removal or de-notification of its name was made by Dukhtaran-e-Millat. Noting that section 36(3) of UAPA empowers the central government for admission and disposal of an application, the court said:“The petition is dismissed since an alternative remedy prescribed under the statute is available to the petitioner.”During the hearing, ASG Chetan Sharma appearing for Centre opposed the plea by submitting that the same must be dismissed with cost for the reason that a terrorist organization has “woken up after 18 years” after being declared a terrorist organization. “It is the prerogative of Central Govt to say who is terrorist and who is not,” Sharma said. ASG informed court that at the time of amendment of UAPA in 2004 and after introduction of sections 2(1)(m) and 35 listing out terrorist organisations in the Schedule, the petitioner organization was already listed at serial no. 29 and therefore the information on the same was already in public domain. It was submitted that the petition, now seeking further information and a direction to quash the impugned notification, was not maintainable. On the other hand, petitioner’s counsel submitted that the organization got to know about the listing of its name only in 2018 when some of its members were chargesheeted in a case. Justice Dayal told petitioner’s counsel: “To be fair, you cannot say that when the Schedule was promulgated in 2004 and is in public domain, it has to be specifically communicated. What procedure happened because you were a banned organization is a different issue, it is not before this court. Your prayer is to quash the notification. The procedure for de-notification has to be processed first. In section 36, the de notification procedure is given, you have to go there. Then the government needs to apply its mind.”In the petition before the court, the DeM had prayed for supply of a copy of the UAPA notification and removal of its name from the list of organisations mentioned in the first schedule of the Act.Section 3 gives power to the Central Government to declare an association unlawful. The terrorist organisations are mentioned in the First Schedule of the Act.Title: DUKHTARAN-E-MILLAT v. UNION OF INDIACitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 63

Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea By Asiya Andrabi's Dukhtaran-E-Millat Challenging UAPA Ban

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags