ORDER :

Heard Ms. Nitya Ramakrishnan, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner. The respondents are represented by Mr. K.M. Natraj, learned Additional Solicitor General of India.

2. The petitioner is an accused in the case arising out of FIR no. 150 of 2022 registered under Sections 4,5 and 6 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and 13,15,16,18 and 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. He was arrested on 07.04.2022 and rejection of his bail by the High Court on 16.08.2023 has led to the present Special Leave Petition.

3. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would contend that considering the materials which have been gathered by the prosecution in the present matter, the restriction under the proviso to Section 43D(5) of the UAPA Act would not come in the way for consideration of the bail for the petitioner. The counsel refers to the materials on record to argue that statement of the co-accused is the primary basis to implicate the present petitioner and those being inadmissible in law, cannot justify further detention without the benefit of bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Senior Counsel further submits that SUFA is not amongst the list of ban