The court emphasized the importance of prima facie evidence, the right to a speedy trial, and the lack of incriminating material in the possession of the accused.

JUDGMENT :

By filing this appeal under Section 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as NIA Act), the appellant Alam @ Mohd. Alam has challenged the order dated 30.5.2022 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.3/Special Judge, NIA Special Court, A.T.S., Lucknow (in short Special Court) whereby bail application of the appellant was rejected.

2. The bail application of Sidhique Kappan was heard and rejected by learned Single Judge of this Court on 2.8.2022. That was so heard because at that time the bail application of Sidhique Kappan was decided by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Mathura as the case was pending in the court of Mathura District. Thereafter, on the application moved by the prosecution, the case was transferred to Special Court, Lucknow, the court established for trying the cases of such nature. The application was allowed per order dated 13.12.2021 and the case was transferred to the Special Court, Lucknow. This case was investigated by the Special Task Force.

3. Under Section 21 sub clause (2) of the NIA Act, the appeal shall be heard by a Bench of two Judges of the High Court. For this reason, this appeal has been listed and heard by this Division Bench.

4. The appellant is presently in jail having been arrested on 5.10.2020 in Case Crime No.0199/2020, Police Station Manth, District Mathura, wherein a chargesheet has been filed in court on 2.4.2021 under Sections 153-A, 295-A, 124-A, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code,1860 (in short I.P.C.), Sections 65 and 72 of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 and Sections 17 and 18 of The Unlawful Activities ( Prevention ) Act, 1967 ( in short UAPA ).

5. The bail application filed by the appellant was rejected by the learned Special Court observing that the accused/ appellant is named in the First Information Report ( in short F.I.R.) and the chargesheet had been filed against him after investigation, so at this stage, it cannot be said that he is completely innocent. The learned Special Court further observed that the application of the co accused has already been rejected, hence in view of the learned Special Court, the accused appellant was not entitled for bail and the Special Court rejected the bail application. Being aggrieved of this rejection order, this appeal has been preferred.

6. Heard Shri Amarjeet Singh Rakhra, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Umesh Chandra Verma, learned A.G.A. for the respondent.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant Shri Rakhra argued that :

i). Even from the perusal of the F.I.R. No.0199/2020, it is clear that the appellant has no role in the commission of the alleged offence. He was just ferrying the passengers in his taxi to the place of their destination.

ii). There is no allegation against the appellant that he was associated with any terrorist organization or was soliciting any donation or funding or had any linkage with either P.F.I. or C.F.I.

iii). No incriminating material was recovered from the possession of appellant or on his pointing out and a thorough investigation of his technical footprints (Mobile Data records and Social Website etc.) revealed that the appellant is not associated with any suspicious or anti national activities.

iv). It is an admitted position that the investigating agency has found no link of receiving any financial aid from any suspected organization or individual nor any heavy/suspicious transactions in the Bank account of the appellant were traced.

v). The appellant is neither engaged in any unlawful activity as defined under Section 2(o) of the UAPA nor is a part of any unlawful association as defined under Section 2 (p) of UAPA.

vi). The offences under Sections mentioned in the chargesheet are not made out against the appellant even if the story of the prosecution is believed on its face value. Sections 17 and 18 of the UAPA which relates to raising funds for terrorist activities and punishment there