Supreme Court Dismisses Appeals in UAPA Case, Orders Speedy Trial

The Supreme Court dealt with two appeals arising from an order of the Karnataka High Court concerning the grant of bail under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA). The case involved two accused persons namely, Saleem Khan and Mohd. Zaid. The background facts reveal that an FIR was registered in Bengaluru under Sections 153A, 120B, 121, 121A of the Indian Penal Code, along with Sections 13, 18 and 20 of the UAPA. The allegations concerned conspiracy and unlawful activities linked to extremist organisations. The NIA (National Investigation Agency) later took over the case.

HC’s Decision: Before the Karnataka High Court, Saleem Khan was granted bail, whereas Mohd. Zaid was denied bail. This order led to cross-challenges before the Supreme Court: State/NIA filed an appeal against bail granted to Saleem Khan, whereas Mohd. Zaid appealled against the rejection of his bail.

Issues Raised: Whether the High Court was right in granting default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC on the ground that the charge-sheets were filed without contemporaneous sanction under Section 45(1) UAPA, and whether a subsequent sanction could cure the defect to defeat the accused’s indefeasible right.

Supreme Court Held: The Supreme Court declined to interfere with the High Court’s reasoning. It upheld the grant of bail to Saleem Khan, noting his alleged association was only with a non-banned organisation, and emphasised that he had already been on bail for over three years with no progress in the trial.

Regarding Mohd. Zaid, the Court affirmed the High Court’s findings of his alleged links with banned terrorist organisations and active role in aiding their operations. The Court, however, expressed concern over prolonged custody of more than 5½ years without commencement of trial. It directed the Trial Court to expedite the trial and complete it within two years, stressing cooperation by the prosecution and the accused. It also clarified that bail granted to Saleem Khan could be cancelled if he attempted to delay proceedings. Thus, both appeals were dismissed.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below