Bombay High Court: In the present case, three appeals were decided together, wherein there was a prayer for bail under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’) pending on the file of the Special Judge, Nashik, registered with Anti-Terrorist Squad Police Station, Kalachowki, Mumbai, under Sections 121-A, 153-A, 120-B, 109, 116, 201 of the Penal Code (‘IPC’) and under Section 13(1)(b) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (‘UAPA’).
The Division Bench of A.S. Gadkari* and Shyam C. Chandak, JJ., opined that even if no overt act or violations were carried out till now, the material on record clearly indicated that prima facie evidence of conspiracy to commit offence/s punishable under Section 121 of IPC was made out. The Court also opined that the appellants were given specified specialized duties to further the conspiracy and the allegations against them were well-founded and thus could not be ignored or brushed aside. Thus, the Court dismissed the appeals and held that the trial Court did not commit any error in passing the impugned orders.
Background
The prosecution case was that on 14-06-2022, an inaugural ceremony of the new office of the Popular Front of India (‘PFI’) situated in front of Jameatus Swalehat Madarsa, Tension Chowk, Azad Nagar, Malegaon took place and at the said occasion, appellants and other people were present. After the opening ceremony of the said office was over, a secret meeting of the members of PFI was convened. In the said meeting, appellants and other persons highlighted various atrocities being committed against the Muslim Community in India and it emphasized on the need of unity of Muslim Community to wage a war against the country by adopting any mode. Accused 1 was the head of PFI and instigated the persons present in the meeting to motivate people from Muslim Community with similar thinking, to enhance communication with like-minded persons from the Community to create atmosphere against the Government of India and flared the emotions of people from Muslim Community. He also issued a ‘Fatwa’ and told to kill any person who would speak against the Muslim religion. He and other accused instigated the Muslim Community to have hatred against the people of other religions to cause disturbance in the country. Accused 1 also instigated other accused prompting them to enhance communication with people from their community to inspire them to wage a war in the State of Maharashtra and against the Government of India.
It was submitted that Accused 1 attracted youngsters having extremist ideology from Muslim Community and was brainwashing them to wipe out their identity as Indians and to become radical Muslims and to impose Sharia Law in India in due course of time. The aim of the accused persons was to foster hatred towards other religion and Government of India and to create division amongst Indian creating problem with the unity and integrity of India.
The bail applications preferred by the appellants under Section 439 of CrPC were turned down by the trial Court by its impugned orders.
Analysis, Law, and Decision
The Court noted that the appellants, along with other accused persons, conspired to overawe the Government with criminal force. The Court opined that there was material available on record in the form of statements of witnesses and the documents seized from the electronic devices of the accused persons that, they indulged into activity of inciting like-minded people to join them to overawe the Government by use of criminal force. They also conspired to transform India into an Islamic country by 2047. The Court opined that they were not only propagators but were actively intending to implement the Vision-2047 document of their organization.
The Court held that there was more than sufficient material available on record to prima facie show the involvement of the appellants in the present crime to apply Section 121-A of IPC. The Court opined that even if no overt act or violations were carried out till now, the material on record clearly indicated that prima facie evidence of conspiracy to commit offence/s punishable under Section 121 of IPC was made out.
The Court noted that the appellants had participated in spreading hatred against the State and in spreading anti-national agenda through various means of propaganda including use of electronic media by creating WhatsApp groups and circulating messages detrimental to the interest of the nation.
The Court took note of Vision-2047 document which indicated that it was a sinister plot and design to transform India into an Islamic State by adopting all possible methods mentioned therein. It was a conspiracy to commit horrendous acts perpetrated by the appellants pursuant to their conspiracy, amounts to conspire to overawe or to attempt to wage war against the Government of India.
The Court relied on State of Maharashtra v. Som Nath Thapa, (1996) 4 SCC 659, wherein the Supreme Court held that it was not necessary that each of the conspirators must know what the other conspirators would do. Therefore, the Court opined that in the present case what one accused was doing or intending to do, need not be known to other accused because all of them formed a chain and had joined together to conspire to do a specific act.
The Court opined that the appellants were given specified specialized duties to further the conspiracy and the allegations against them were well-founded and thus could not be ignored or brushed aside. The Court stated that if the appellants were released on bail, there was every possibility that they might tamper with the evidence at this crucial stage. Thus, the Court dismissed the appeals and held that the trial Court did not commit any error in passing the impugned orders.
[Razi Ahmed Khan v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 1623, decided on 11-06-2024]
*Judgment authored by: Justice A.S. Gadkari
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Appellant: Ashok Mundargi, Senior Counsel i/b Advocate Pravada Raut
For the Respondents: APP Ashvini A. Takalkar
Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 HERE
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
