Back
Grants Bail to UAPA Accused Mohammad Saqib Citing 8-Year Custody,
The on Monday granted bail to Mohammad Saqib @ Saqib Iftekar, an accused in a case registered under the and other penal statutes, after noting that he had been in custody for nearly eight years and the trial was unlikely to conclude anytime soon.
A Division Bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Ravinder Dudeja allowed Saqib's appeal against the trial court's order rejecting his bail plea. The court was "particularly moved" by the and the slow pace of proceedings.
Prolonged Custody Tips the Scales
Saqib was arrested on , in connection with FIR RC-38/2018/NIA/DLI. The charges include , , and . The prosecution alleged that Saqib was a member of the pro- group , propagated ideology, supported , and established contacts in the Tral region of Jammu and Kashmir to arrange local terrorists.
The NIA had cited 120 witnesses, but only 40 had been examined by the time the bail appeal was heard. Although the agency stated it would drop 39 witnesses, the court observed that the trial was still
"not likely to end any time soon."
Court Examines Witness Statements
Saqib's counsel argued that he was at best a "" and not part of the core terror module. The only allegations against him were that he visited Kashmir in and with co-accused Muhammad Absar to request a witness, Reyaz Ahmad Najar (PW-27), to facilitate a meeting with militants. The counsel submitted that a of PW-27's statement showed Saqib neither made such a request nor showed interest in meeting militants. Two other key witnesses — Zubair Siddique Lone (PW-35) and a protected witness (PW-37) — also did not truly implicate him, it was argued.
The NIA's Special Public Prosecutor countered that Saqib introduced the prime motivator of the terror module to another accused for arms procurement, went to Kashmir to establish contact with terrorists for training, and procured weapons. Incriminating pamphlets and other material were recovered from his possession.
The High Court, however, found that the three principal witnesses regarding the Kashmir visits had already been examined and their testimony did not warrant continued detention.
"
we do not find them grave enough to prolong the period of detention of the appellant during trial,"
the court stated.
Balancing Liberty and National Security
The court engaged with the legal interplay between and the under . It referred to its own judgment in and the 's observations in and , noting that coupled with unlikelihood of trial completion can overcome statutory restrictions.
"Having considered the statements of the witnesses and the allegations against the appellant, and being moved particularly by the long period of incarceration of the appellant, we are of the opinion that the appellant has been able to make out a case for being released on bail,"
the court held.
Conditions for Release
The court set aside the trial court's order and directed Saqib's release on furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000 with two sureties of the like amount. He must surrender his passport, cannot leave the country without permission, and cannot leave his native district of Hapur except to attend trial in Delhi or report to the NIA. He is permitted to use only one mobile phone or landline number, must report to the NIA's Lucknow office once every fortnight, and is barred from contacting witnesses or disseminating anti-national material on social media.
The court clarified that all observations were made solely for the purpose of considering bail and shall not influence the merits of the case.
