Back
G. S. SANDHAWALIA, HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN
Amir Nazir – Appellant
Versus
National Investigation Agency (NIA) – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mr. G.S. Sandhawalia, J.
Present appeal has been filed under section 21 (4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (for short 2008 Act') against the order of the Learned Sessions Judge, SAS Nagar, Mohali dated 25.03.2022, wherein the bail application was dismissed in case SC-91 of 2019 titled as NIA v. Fazil Bashir Pinchoo etc. RC- 39/2018/NIA/DLI dated 20.12.2018 under Sections 120-B, 121, 121 A, 122, 307, 506, 201 IPC, under Sections 16 , 18, 20, 23 Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 (for short 1967 Act') and under Sections 3 , 6 Explosive Substances Act, 1908 registered as FIR No. 163 dated 15.09.2018 at Police Station: Division No.1, Jalandhar, of the appellant Amir Nazir who has been arrayed as A-3 by the Investigating Agency.
2. The reasoning given by the Learned Special Judge was that the present appellant is accused of facilitating the delivery of the consignment four hand grenades to Fazil Bashir Pinchoo (A-1) and Shahid Quyoom (A-2) and was part of the conspiracy of carrying out grenade attack at the premises of Police Station Maqsuddan, Jalandhar on 14.09.2018. It was held that they were in contact with each other through secure means of communicat
The court established that under the UAPA, particularly Section 43D(5), the standard for denying bail is based on whether the accusations are prima facie true, which requires a careful examination of....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of Section 43-D (5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, and its application in granting bail to the accused durin....
The court established that involvement with a banned terrorist organization and the collection of levies for such groups constitutes serious offenses under the UA(P) Act, warranting denial of bail wh....
The court affirmed that harboring a terrorist under UAPA is a serious offense, justifying the denial of bail due to the evidence suggesting active support of terrorism.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for a surface analysis of probative value of evidence at the stage of examining the question of granting bail, and the requirement for rea....
The court's decision emphasized the serious nature of the offenses, the organized network involved, and the prima facie evidence supporting the role of each accused.
Bail – Being a member of banned organization is also an offence under UA(P) Act and bail can be declined.
The court reiterated that under the UAPA, bail is the exception, emphasizing the prima facie strength of allegations against the accused involved in financing a terrorist organization.
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
