No UAPA Offence Over Attending Meetings Of Organisation Which Isn't Banned : Supreme Court Affirms Bail

The Supreme Court recently rejected the appeal filed by the National Investigation Agency challenging the bail granted by the Karnataka High Court to one Saleem Khan under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act over alleged links with 'Al-Hind' organisation.The Court, noting that 'Al-Hind' was not an organisation banned as per the UAPA, observed that no prima facie offence under the UAPA is attracted if a person is having meetings with it."While dealing with the prayer for bail of accused no.11, Saleem Khan, the High Court noticed that the allegations found in the charge-sheet related to his connections with an organisation by the name of ALHind, which admittedly is not a banned organisation under the schedule to UAPA. Therefore, to say that he was attending meetings of the said organisation, AL-Hind and others would not amount to any prima facie offence," observed the bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice KV Viswanathan.In January 2020, the CCB police to the Suddaguntepalya Police Station, Mico Layout Sub-Division, registered the FIR against 17 accused persons under the provisions of sections 153A, 121A, 120B, 122, 123, 124A, 125 of IPC and sections 13, 18 and 20 of UA(P) Act. The case was later transferred to the NIA.The High Court, while granting bail to Saleem Khan, refused bail to another accused Mohd. Zaid, who was alleged to have contacts with ISIS handlers through dark web.As regards Saleem Khan, the High Court observed, "Mere attending meetings and becoming Member of Al-Hind Group, which is not a banned organization as contemplated under the Schedule of UA(P) Act and attending jihadi meetings, purchasing training materials and organizing shelters for co-members is not an offence as contemplated under the provisions of section 2(k) or section 2(m) of UA(P) Act."The Supreme Court refused to interfere with the High Court's order, which granted bail to Saleem Khan and refused bail to Mohd.Zaid, observing that it was passed after considering all relevant aspects.The Supreme Court also directed the expedition of the trial, observing that the accused cannot be forced to languish in jail as undertrial prisoners for a long time. A deadline of two years was fixed to complete the trial.For Appellant(s): Mr. A Velan, AOR; Ms. Navpreet Kaur, Adv.; Mr. I Abdul Basith, Adv.; Mr. Prince Singh, Adv.; Mr. Nilay Rai, Adv.; Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv.; Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR For Respondent(s): Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR; Mr. R. Chandrachud, AOR.Case : Union of India v. Saleem KhanCitation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 833Click here to read the order

No UAPA Offence Over Attending Meetings Of Organisation Which Isn't Banned : Supreme Court Affirms Bail

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

No UAPA Offence Over Attending Meetings Of Organisation Which Isn't Banned : Supreme Court Affirms Bail

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers