The court held that allegations against appellants lacked sufficient evidence connecting them to terrorist activities, allowing for bail under the UA(P) Act.

JUDGMENT :

RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the National Investigating Agency (in short ‘NIA’).

2. These two appeals are arising out of the common order dated 28.06.2024 (hereinafter called ‘the impugned orders’) passed by learned Special Judge, NIA, Patna, Bihar (hereinafter called the ‘learned trial court’) in Special Case No. 07 of 2022/R.C. No. 31 of 2022.

3. By the impugned orders, the learned trial court has been pleased to reject the prayer for bail of the appellants during the ongoing trial. Both the appellants are aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the orders of the learned trial court.

4. In order to appreciate the matter, it would be necessary to take note of the prosecution case.

Prosecution Case

5. The prosecution case is based on a self-written report dated 12.07.2022 of Akrar Ahmed Khan, the Inspector of Police- cum-Officer-in-Charge of Phulwarisharif Police Station, Patna. In the written report, the informant alleged that on 11.07.2022, at about 7:30 PM, he got an information that some miscreants are planning to do some occurrence during the proposed Patna visit of the Prime Minister of India, they are doing training for a fortnight for this purpose. On this information, the Officer-in-Charge of Phulwarisharif Police Station brought it to the notice of the senior officers. The senior officers constituted a team of police officers and with the said team, the Officer-in-Charge/informant reached ‘Ahmed Palace’ situated in Naya Tola Nahar under Phulwarisharif Police Station. On reaching there and in course of verification, it came to his notice that some unknown persons are holding meeting on the second floor of the ‘Ahmed Palace’ during last two months and visit of unknown persons are frequent there. The informant came to know that during 6^th-7^th July also, a meeting had taken place in which some doubtful people had come.

6. It is alleged that as the informant was conducting the verification, in the meantime, Md. Jalaluddin and Athar Parvez, who are the owner of ‘Ahmed Palace’, came there. In their presence, in presence of two independent witnesses, when the second floor of ‘Ahmed Palace’ was searched, in course of search from a room, he found a literature, namely, ‘India 2047 towards Rule of Islamic India, Internal Document not for circulation’ which was in seven pages and there were five copies of the same. In search, thirty pamphlets written in Urdu and twenty five pamphlets written in Hindi of Popular Front of India, 20 February 2021, forty nine flags made of clothes, red, green and white bearing blue colour star on the flag, booklets printed in Urdu were found. The search team also found thirty chairs placed in the big hall and on a table, photocopy of lease deed on a non-judicial stamp paper, showing the name of house owner of Farhat Bano, wife of Jalaluddin and the name of lessee as Athar Parvez, son of Abdul Qayum Ansari was found. The house owner informed that the second floor of the building was taken by Athar Parvez for purpose of giving training and training was provided on 6-7 July 2022 in which people from other states had come and several doubtful person had also received training there. Athar Parvez, however, denied but when the police enquired from him in presence of Jalaluddin and local people, he told them that he was an active member of SIMI organization and after the SIMI organization was banned and the members of the same were in jail, he was providing them legal help.

7. He informed that at present he was District General Secretary of SDPI party. He disclosed that the parcha, flags and the booklets