Appellants Released on Bail Due to Delays in Trial and Limited Involvement in Alleged Terrorist Activities
In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court has granted bail to Haris Nisar Langoo and Zamin Adil Bhat, accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA), citing prolonged incarceration and trial delays. The decision was rendered by a bench comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja, who highlighted that the appellants had been in custody for over four years with no certainty of trial conclusion in the near future.
The appellants were implicated in a case involving alleged conspiracy to commit terrorist acts in Jammu & Kashmir and other parts of India. The prosecution accused them of association with online propaganda groups and possession of anti-national material, but no overt acts or violent involvement were alleged against them.
During the proceedings, the counsel for the appellants argued that the delay in trial constituted a ground for bail, emphasizing that the prosecution intended to examine around 359 witnesses, with only 12 having been examined so far. They contended that at this pace, the trial could extend over several decades. The defense also pointed out that the appellants were implicated merely for being part of certain social media groups without evidence of active participation in terrorist activities.
The High Court, referencing Article 21 of the Constitution of India, underscored the prolonged pre-trial detention as a violation of individual liberty. The bench also noted that other co-accused in the case had already been granted bail or discharged, suggesting a need for parity in judicial treatment.
While granting bail, the court imposed stringent conditions to balance national security concerns with individual liberty. The appellants are required to furnish personal bonds, surrender their passports, mark regular attendance at the local police station, and refrain from engaging in or spreading any anti-national activities online or offline.
This judgment is a pivotal moment in the application of UAPA provisions, emphasizing the judiciary's role in safeguarding constitutional rights against prolonged detention without trial conclusion.
Bottom Line:
Prolonged incarceration and delay in trial can be considered as grounds for granting bail in UAPA cases, especially when the alleged role of the accused is limited and non-violent in nature.
Statutory provision(s):
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 Sections 43D, 18; Constitution of India, 1950 Article 21; Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 120B, 121A
Haris Nisar Langoo v. National Investigation Agency, (Delhi)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2869442
