In a landmark decision, the Court underscores the importance of constitutional rights over procedural detention, allowing bail for an approver under exceptional circumstances.
In a significant ruling on March 23, 2026, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court granted bail to Ajaz Ahmed, an approver in a high-profile terror case, highlighting the balance between procedural law and constitutional rights. The case, which involves allegations of terrorist activities linked to banned outfits, had Ajaz Ahmed initially detained under Section 343(4)(b) of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which mandates the detention of an approver until the trial's conclusion unless already on bail.
The petitioner, Ajaz Ahmed, was implicated in the FIR No. 358/2023, registered at Police Station Surankote, for alleged involvement with terrorist groups and possession of illegal arms. He was apprehended alongside co-accused during a police operation. Ajaz later accepted a pardon and cooperated with the prosecution, providing full disclosure of the events related to the incident as required under the legal provisions.
The High Court's decision, presided by Justice Mohd Yousuf Wani, marks a pivotal point in interpreting the legal framework concerning approvers. The Court emphasized that while Section 343(4)(b) of BNSS necessitates detention, it does not impose an absolute prohibition on granting bail under exceptional circumstances. The ruling draws upon the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 528 of BNSS, akin to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, allowing the Court to act in the interest of justice and personal liberty as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
Justice Wani noted that the detention of an approver is primarily to protect them from potential threats and to ensure their testimony is not compromised. However, once an approver has fulfilled their obligations by providing truthful testimony, continued detention could unjustly infringe upon their right to liberty. The Court's ruling referenced precedents, including the Supreme Court's stance in similar contexts, affirming that constitutional rights cannot be overshadowed by procedural statutes.
Ajaz Ahmed's legal team successfully argued that his continued detention was unwarranted as he had consistently complied with the conditions of his pardon, and his testimony remained unchallenged. His release on bail underscores a judicial recognition of balancing procedural mandates with fundamental rights, particularly in lengthy trials where detention could otherwise extend indefinitely.
This ruling has broader implications, potentially influencing future cases involving approvers, by emphasizing the judiciary's role in safeguarding personal liberties even amidst serious allegations. The decision also sends a strong message about the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that legal procedures do not become punitive in nature, especially when an individual has cooperated with the judicial process.
The Court granted Ajaz Ahmed bail on conditions, including the furnishing of surety and personal bonds, ensuring his appearance at trial and compliance with any further court orders. This development not only impacts the involved parties but also sets a precedent for judicial discretion in similar cases, reinforcing the principle that justice must be served within the framework of constitutional rights.
Bottom Line:
Grant of bail to an approver under Section 306(4)(b) of the Code corresponding to Section 343(4)(b) of Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) is permissible under exceptional circumstances, provided the approver has complied with the conditions of pardon and made a full and true disclosure at trial.
Statutory provision(s):
- Section 343(4)(b) of Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
- Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
- Article 21 of the Constitution of India
- Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Ajaz Ahmed v. UT of J&K, (Jammu And Kashmir) : Law Finder Doc id # 2871207
