Can 4.5 years in custody earn bail under Section 43D(5) UAPA? Rajasthan High Court on Udaipur Kanhaiya Lal murder case
A bail court does not weigh evidence or defences such as language of disclosure statements, held the Division Bench.
National Investigation Agency
UAPA Property Attachment: Jharkhand HC Distinguishes Legitimate Assets from Alleged Terror Proceeds
The Court held that the purchase of the scooty cannot be said to be from the proceeds of crime on account of the self-acquired financial prowess of Appellant 1 and merely because Appellant 1 is the wife of Accused 1. The Court observed that there was a total dearth of evidence and found no reason to interfere with the earlier order and affirmed the attachment.
Supreme Court directs NIA to submit report on applicability of UAPA in Beldanga violence; Calcutta High Court to assess report
In the present case, the Government of India directed the NIA to investigate a FIR filed by West Bengal Police under multiple laws. The State argued that, even without investigation or supporting material, the order itself claimed the FIR allegations fall under Section 15(1)(a) of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.
‘Trial cannot be concluded in the near future’; Kerala HC grants bail to four PFI Members in BJP Activist S.K. Sreenivasan Murder Case
“On 16-04-2022, 5 accused persons came on three two-wheelers, and inflicted grievous injuries on Sreenivasan and killed him by hacking his head and other parts of his body with choppers.”
‘Not a case of passive support to terrorist organisation’; Delhi High Court denies bail to alleged ISIS associate in UAPA case
The Court stated that the recovery of incriminating material recovered from the mobile phone of the appellant showing pro-ISIS material showed that the appellant is deeply influenced with the philosophy and ideology of the ISIS.
SC urges youth to resist peer pressure; calls for concerted effort from family, school & community to mitigate drug addiction
The Court held that NIA could investigate non-scheduled offence, or a person involved in a non-scheduled offence, provided there is a connection with the scheduled offence. This nexus between any other offence and the Scheduled Offence is of critical importance and must be present to enable the NIA to investigate any other offence committed by an accused in connection with the Scheduled Offence.
“Bail is the rule, Jail is an exception” Supreme Court reiterates; Grants conditional bail to person accused under UAPA
The Court took serious note of distortions in the chargesheet vis-a-vis attributing certain statements to the protected witness, which he did not make, stating that NIA owes an explanation, and the investigating machinery must be fair.
Explained | Supreme Court’s verdict on retrospective applicability of CrPC in Jammu & Kashmir
Supreme Court said that while we are holding that the requirement of an authorization or an empowerment is mandatory for conveying a complaint, it being at the conclusion of investigation, would not preclude the investigating agency from complying with it thereafter.
Bombay HC disallows prosecution of alleged affiliates of a banned organisation for MCOCA charges due to delay in taking of cognizance by Trial Court
The Court noted that cognizance of the offence was not taken by the Trial Court as stipulated by Section 2(d) of the MCOCA, therefore, the accused persons could not be prosecuted on the charges of S. 3 MCOCA.
Read why Supreme Court sets aside Madras HC bail order granting bail to PFI Members in UAPA case
“We are conscious of the legal position that we should be we are slow in interfering with the order when the bail has been granted by the High Court, however it is equally well settled that if such order of granting bail is found to be illegal and perverse, it must be set aside.”
Ram Navami Violence| Calcutta High Court directs immediate handover of investigation reports to NIA
Calcutta High Court held that “any further delay in complying with the solemn directions would be absolutely contemptuous.”
‘No extension of time for Investigation should be prayed for at the last moment’; holds SC in an eye-opening case for NIA, State Police
Supreme Court also reiterated that the grant of sanction is nowhere contemplated under Section 167 of the CrPC.
Madras High Court | Once UAPA charges quashed, accused cannot be denied bail on ground that criminal conspiracy under Section 120-B IPC attracts the offence punishable under the provisions of UAPA
Madras High Court: In an appeal against the order passed by the Special Court rejecting the appellant’s bail, the division
Madras High Court grants bail to the accused in a case registered merely based on suspicion and confession statement
Madras High Court: In a case related to an appeal filed to set aside the judgment and enlarge the appellant
Madras High Court| PT warrant can never be converted into regular warrant in a case where the accused person is already on bail; opportunity should be given to the accused to explain his non-appearance
Madras High Court: In a case related to an appeal filed for the cancellation of an order of dismissing the bail application
Bhima Koregaon| Here’s why Supreme Court granted permanent bail to Dr. Varavara Rao on medical grounds
Supreme Court: Adopting a humanitarian approach, the 3-judges Bench comprising Uday Umesh Lalit, Aniruddha Bose, and Sudhanshu Dhulia, JJ., had granted permanent
UAPA| ‘Mere association with a terrorist organisation not enough’. SC grants bail to 2 Kerala men booked over Maoist links
Supreme Court: The bench of Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka*, JJ has granted bail to Thwaha Fasal and Allan Shuaib, booked
Najeeb KA, accused of chopping off Kerala professor’s palm over “objectionable” question, gets bail. Read why Supreme Court upheld bail despite finding charges against him “a serious threat to societal harmony”
Najeeb, who along with some other members of Popular Front of India (PFI) had chopped¬off the professor’s right palm, has been in jail for much more than five years and there are 276 witnesses left to be examined.
Central Govt. appoints Special Public Prosecutor, Gautam Narayan on behalf of NIA before NIA Special Court, New Delhi
S.O. 4590(E).—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 15 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (34 of