UAPA & Preventive Detention: Important High Court Judgments 2022

LiveLaw reported almost 7,000 orders and judgments in 2022 from various High Courts across the country. Here are some important decisions relating to preventive detention and Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967:1. "Matter Pertains To National Security": Allahabad HC Denies Bail To Man Accused Of Running Fake Lottery, Sending Money To PakistanCase title - Prakash @ Jai Prakash Ruhela v. State of U.PCase Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 129The Allahabad High Court denied bail to a man who has been accused of running a fake lottery to dupe Indian nationals and sending the money to handlers in Pakistan.The Bench of Justice Krishan Pahal opined that even though the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act have not been initiated against the bail-applicant, prakash, however, since the matter pertains to national security and therefore, it is not a fit case for bail.2. Allahabad High Court Denies Bail To 2 Alleged PFI Members Accused Of Conspiring To Kill Hindu Religious LeadersCase title - Ansad Badruddin And Another v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow And 2 Others [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1763 of 2022]Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 526The Allahabad High Court denied bail to two alleged members of Popular Front of India (PFI) who have been booked under the UAPA for allegedly conspiring to commit the murder of people and Office Holders of Hindu Religious Organizations and for creating fear and terror in the Society."...considering the fact that the recovery being made from the appellants of seized objectionable articles including explosive substances, which was to be used by them to attack on Senior Leader of different Hindu Religious Organization and to blast different sensitive places of Uttar Pradesh, for which no satisfactory explanation has been given by the appellants, thus, it cannot be said that the involvement of the appellants in their nefarious designs could be ruled out and further looking into their criminal antecedents and the fact that the trial is in progress, which is fixed for framing charges against the appellants by the trial Court," the bench of Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Renu Agarwal observed as it refused to grant bail to the accused.3. 'Seriousness & Severity Of Crime Would Remain Till Such Time The Accused Is Pronounced Not Guilty': Bombay HC While Rejecting Varavara Rao's Bail PleaCase Title: P Varavara Rao v. National Investigation AgencyCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 154Refusing to grant permanent bail on medical grounds to Bhima Koregaon - Elgar Parishad accused poet Varavara Rao the Bombay High Court said that prima facie observations regarding "seriousness and severity" of the crime he is accused of would remain till he is pronounced "not guilty."Therefore, based on Rao's sound clinical summary dated December 15, 2021, and the allegations against him of being the "main conspirator," he was not entitled to medial bail, the court held."Seriousness and severity of the crime would remain till such time the accused is pronounced not guilty of the crime alleged to have been committed by him. Role attributed to the accused is serious. He is one of the main conspirators. Therefore, in our opinion, on the medical ground the accused is not entitled to get bail", a division bench of Justices Sunil Shukre and GA Sanap observed.4. Bhima Koregaon Case : Bombay High Court Dismisses Gautam Navlakha's Plea To Shift Him To House ArrestCase Title: Gautam Navlakha vs National Investigation AgencyCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 161The Bombay High Court dismissed a petition by senior journalist Gautam Navlakha seeking to shifted out of Taloja Prison and be placed under house arrest, instead, in the Bhima Koregaon – Elgar Parishad Caste violence case.A division bench of Justices Sunil Shukre and GA Sanap said that whatever grievances Navlakha had in prison could be placed before the trial court for appropriate action.5. Bombay High Court Rejects Review Plea Seeking Default Bail To Varavara Rao, Vernon Gonsalves & Arun FerreiraCase Title: Dr P Varavara Rao & othrs vs State of Maharashtra and othrsCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 173The Bombay High Court held re-hearing of the matter on a point which was not at all urged, is impermissible in law, under the guise of review. Nor can review be claimed or asked for merely for a fresh hearing or canvassing a totally new submission.The bench thus rejected a review application filed by three accused in the Bhima Koregaon – Elgar Parishad Case seeking default bail alleging factual corrections in the order refusing them default bail. The fact that the accused had also filed for default was not argued before the court."We, therefore, find it difficult to accede to the submission on behalf of the applicants that a factual error had crept in… It is trite that disguised as a review, it is not permissible even for an erroneous decision to be, "re-heard and corrected".6. 2008 Indian Mujahideen Case: 14 Yrs On, Bombay High Court Orders...

UAPA & Preventive Detention: Important High Court Judgments 2022

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags