UAPA Cannot Be Used When the Accused Does Not Have an Active Knowledge of the Offence: Delhi High Court

Must Read

Transfer of Winding-up Proceedings Allowed Under S. 434, Restrictions Under 2016 Rules To Not Apply: Allahabad High Court

This appeal relates to the question of transfer of winding-up proceeding from the High Court (Company Court) to the...

Constitutional Court of South Africa Declares Provisions of Domestic Workers’ Injury Compensation Legislation To Be Unconstitutional

The Constitutional Court of South Africa in Sylvia Mahlangu v Minister of Labour , declared parts of the Compensation...

Bail Granted Under Section 167(2) CrPC Can Be Cancelled Under Section 439(2) CrPC: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that the right of default bail of the Accused can be cancelled under Section 439(2)...

Authority Cannot Interfere With Legal Heir Certificate When There Are No Issues Between 2 Wives: Madras High Court

The petition, filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India in Madras High Court. The case of Lakshmi Jagannathan v....

Kerala High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Notification of Bar Council on Spot Admission

On 23rd November 2020, the Kerala High Court involving a single bench judge of the Honourable Smt. Justice P.V....

Death in Police Custody Requires Post-Mortem: Madras High Court

The petition, filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code in Madras High Court. The case of S....

Follow us

Justice Suresh Kumar Kait held that the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act cannot be charged on the accused when he does not have any knowledge of the offence committed.

Brief Facts of the Case

The Petitioner Faizan Khan and his co-accused were accused of part of one conspiracy in the Delhi riots. He facilitated in obtaining a SIM card used for conspiracy of the protests and took extra money for the same. He has applied for bail in the present case.

Petitioner’s Arguments 

The investigating agency has misapplied and wrongly invoked the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967 (“UAPA”). There is no evidence to prove that the Petitioner had the requisite intention or even was party to any terror activity.

The sole allegation is that he facilitated a SIM card on fictitious documents in exchange for some extra money. It is only alleged that the SIM card was provided by a student (purchaser) to the Jamia coordination committee to coordinate protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019. The Petitioner being stated as the provider of the SIM card is falsely made by the Investigating Agency. Also, the intention of such facilitation is only money and no other.

Thus, the invocation of the UAPA is disproportionate. There is no material to meet the basic ingredients provided under the UAPA, 1967. The Petitioner was neither present in north-east Delhi during the protests nor was he party to any such violence.

Arguments by State

The criminal conspiracy by the Petitioner with his co-accused have deliberately issued the SIM card. The Petitioner was well aware of the conspiracy of riots since the beginning. The said SIM Card was further used to manage and to mobilize the Muslim people of the area on the protest sites. The number also led to Chakka Jaam and riots in various protest sites in Delhi.

Going through the evidence of the investigating agency along with the presumption of the commission of an offence under Section 14-E of UAPA, there exists no ground to grant bail to the petitioner.

Court’s Observations

The Court noted that there was no allegation against the Petitioner that he engaged in any form of terror funding or such similar activity.

Also, the transaction relating to the SIM card had allegedly taken place in December 2019. The violence erupted in north-east Delhi in February. There is no connection between the aforesaid incidents. It is also not alleged that the said SIM card was provided to be utilized for organizing these protests.

The Court concluded that there must be active and actual knowledge by the Petitioner for the commission of offences under the UAPA. In the present case, the Petitioner was unaware of the SIM card being used for organizing the protests.

Court’s Decision

The Petitioner was granted bail on the ground that he did not know the use of SIM cards for organizing the Delhi riots.

Click here to view full judgment.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the Court. Follow us on Google NewsInstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Transfer of Winding-up Proceedings Allowed Under S. 434, Restrictions Under 2016 Rules To Not Apply: Allahabad High Court

This appeal relates to the question of transfer of winding-up proceeding from the High Court (Company Court) to the NCLT.  Facts M/s. Girdhar Trading Company, 2nd...

Constitutional Court of South Africa Declares Provisions of Domestic Workers’ Injury Compensation Legislation To Be Unconstitutional

The Constitutional Court of South Africa in Sylvia Mahlangu v Minister of Labour , declared parts of the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases...

Bail Granted Under Section 167(2) CrPC Can Be Cancelled Under Section 439(2) CrPC: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that the right of default bail of the Accused can be cancelled under Section 439(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Facts...

Authority Cannot Interfere With Legal Heir Certificate When There Are No Issues Between 2 Wives: Madras High Court

The petition, filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India in Madras High Court. The case of Lakshmi Jagannathan v. The Tahsildar, Tambaram Taluk, Chennai. was...

Kerala High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Notification of Bar Council on Spot Admission

On 23rd November 2020, the Kerala High Court involving a single bench judge of the Honourable Smt. Justice P.V. Asha heard the case of...

Death in Police Custody Requires Post-Mortem: Madras High Court

The petition, filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code in Madras High Court. The case of S. Prema v. The Superintendent of...

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order and states “Liberty of a Citizen cannot be taken away in the Absence of Lawyer”

In the case of Parveen v. State of Haryana, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that “a citizen’s liberty cannot be taken away”. This observation...

Revised Gratuity Ceiling Notified by Central Government Applicable To All Establishments Irrespective of Whether Controlled by the State or Centre: Tripura High Court

In the case of Sri Tapas Guha vs Tripura Tea Development Corporation Ltd. and others, a single-judge bench comprising of Hon’ble Justice Akil Kureshi...

Madras High Court Dismisses Tax Case Appeal by OPG Energy Pvt. Ltd.

The OPG Energy Pvt. Ltd. filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It was filed against an order passed...

Jharkhand High Court Disposes of Criminal Revision Petition Against the Judgment Passed by the Learned Sessions Judge With Modification

A criminal revision petition against the Judgment dated 23.07.2014 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in Criminal Appeal No.49/2014 was...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -