1. CRL.A. 263/2025 has been filed by the Appellant challenging the Order dated 11.09.2024, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-02, Patiala House Courts, dismissing I.A. No.01/2024, filed by the Appellant herein in SC No.253/2024 for grant of bail in FIR No.142/2023, registered at Police Station Parliament Street for offences under Sections 186/353/153/452/201/34/120B IPC and Sections 13/16/18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA).

2. CRL.A. 388/2025 has been filed by the Appellant challenging the Order dated 21.11.2024, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-02, Patiala House Courts, dismissing I.A. No.02/2024, filed by the Appellant herein in SC No.253/2024 for grant of bail in FIR No.142/2023, registered at Police Station Parliament Street for offences under Sections 186/353/153/452/201/34/120B IPC and Sections 13/16/18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA).

3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts as stated by the Prosecution are as under:

a. It is stated that on 13.12.2023, after paying homage to the martyrs of 13.12.2001 terrorist attack on the Parliament of India, the regular proceedings of Lok Sabha began. The proceedings were being telecasted and watched live across the country through Sansad TV channel. It is stated that from 12:00 PM, the Question Hour began in the Lok Sabha. It is stated that at around 01:01 PM, when Sh. Khagen Murmu, Hon‟ble MP from Maldah, North-West Bengal was speaking, two persons jumped from the public gallery No. 4, inside the Lok Sabha Main Hall, which was out of bound for the visitors, spectators and public. It is stated that one of those two persons started moving towards the Well of Lok Sabha by jumping over empty seats and was later identified as one Sagar Sharma.

b. It is stated that when Sagar Sharma was within some distance of the Well/Speaker of the Lok Sabha, he was surrounded by the Parliament staff and some MPs who were present in the ongoing proceedings. It is stated that finding himself surrounded, Sagar Sharma took out a canister shaped object from his shoes and released its contents in the Lok Sabha Central Hall. The hall was engulfed in thick, yellow smoke coming out from the canister.

c. It is stated that the second person was identified as one Manoranjan D. It is further stated that he also opened a coloured smoke canister inside the Central Hall of the Lok

Sabha. With painstaking efforts, both these persons were restrained and apprehended by Parliament staff along with the help of MPs.

d. It is stated that the twin emission of thick, coloured smoke triggered terrorized reactions from amongst those present in the Lok Sabha. It is stated that the disruptive nature of the incident brought an end to the ongoing parliamentary discussions, which were of national significance and the proceedings of Lok Sabha were immediately adjourned by the Chair. It is stated that the act had inflicted terror in the minds of not only the members and spectators present in the Lok Sabha, but also of the millions who were watching the proceedings live on TV. It is stated that the terror was evident in the statements of MPs as given to national media immediately after they had come out of the Parliament.

e. While the above incident was taking place inside the Lok Sabha, simultaneously, outside Gate No. 2 and 3 of the Parliament building, one lady, identified as Neelam Ranoliya/Appellant in CRL.A. 263/2025, along with one Amol Shinde, opened similar smoke canisters in full public view and also threw pamphlets. It is stated that the accused were raising slogans also. A PCR call was made by PCR staff ASI Surender Pal and information of the incident was flashed over the police radio. It is stated that the alert raised by the PCR staff was recorded vide DD No. 42A and 43A, dated 13.12.2023, at PS Parliament Street, New Delhi.

f. Neelam and Amol were apprehended by the Delhi Police staff deployed outside the Parliament and were brought to Po