Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, MR.JUSTICE P. V. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ
Shefeek S/o. Shihabudheen – Appellant
Versus
Union of India Represented by Superintendent of Police, Kochi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Raja Vijayaraghavan, J.
The above appeal is preferred by the appellants who are the accused Nos. 62 and 63 in S.C.No.2/2023/NIA on the file of the Special Court for Trial of NIA Cases, Ernakulam. In the above case, they, along with the rest of the accused, stand indicted for having committed offences punishable under sections 120B, 34, 109, 115, 118, 119, 143, 144, 147, 148, 449, 153A, 341, 302, 201, 212 r/w.s. 149, 120B r/w.s. 302 of IPC, Section 3(a)(b)(d) r/w. Section 7 of the Religious Institutions (Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1988 and Sections 13, 16, 18, 18A, 18B, 20, 22C, 23, 38 & 39 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and Section 25 (1) (a) of the Arms Act, 1959. By the order passed by the Special Court, the application for bail preferred by the appellants was dismissed.
1. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
1.1. The Central Government received credible and actionable intelligence indicating that the office bearers, members, and cadres of the Popular Front of India (PFI)—a registered society—and its affiliated organisations in Kerala had conspired to instigate communal violence and radicalise their cadres to commit terrorist acts in the State of Ker
The requirement to communicate the grounds of arrest in writing is mandatory under Article 22(1) of the Constitution, and failure to do so renders the arrest illegal.
The court may grant bail despite statutory restrictions under the UAPA if the accused's right to a speedy trial under Article 21 is infringed due to prolonged detention without reasonable trial prosp....
The court emphasized that constitutional rights to liberty prevail when trials are unduly prolonged, allowing bail despite serious terrorism charges.
Prolonged pre-trial detention without trial completion justifies bail, emphasizing constitutional rights over statutory restrictions.
(1) Grant of bail – Question of discarding material or document at stage of considering bail application of accused on the ground of being not reliable or inadmissible in evidence, is not permissible....
The court established that under the UAPA, knowledge of a person's terrorist activities is crucial for liability under Section 19, and the restrictions on bail under Section 43D(5) apply when there a....
The court established that the prima facie standard under Section 43D of the UAPA is a critical threshold for determining bail applications in cases involving serious charges related to terrorism and....
(1) Bail application – Question of grant of bail concern both liberty of individuals undergoing criminal prosecution as well as interest of criminal justice system in ensuring that those who commit c....
Prolonged detention without trial violates constitutional rights, necessitating bail when evidence of participation in unlawful activities is insufficient.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
