Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 19242
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
MR. SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR, MR. VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL, JJ
MR. FIROZ PASHA – Appellant
Versus
NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.47 OF 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI. HASHMATH PASHA, SR. ADV., SRI. MOHAMMED TAHIR, ADV.
For the Respondents: SRI. P. PRASANNA KUMAR, SPL. P.P.
The court upheld that under the UAP Act, bail can be denied if there are reasonable grounds to believe that the accusations against the accused are prima facie true, especially in cases involving terrorism-related offenses.
Headnote:(A) National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 - Section 21(4); Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 - Sections 15, 16, 18, and 20; Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 120B, 143, 145, 147, 188, 353, and 427 - Bail application of accused challenging the denial of bail by trial court - Appeal rejected as prima facie evidence indicates involvement in violent protest resulting in significant damage and injuries, justifying denial of bail. (Paras 1, 10, 12, 17, and 24)
(B) Bail - Consideration of prima facie evidence - Court must assess whether reasonable grounds exist to believe that accusation is prima facie true, especially under the provisions of special enactments reducing the threshold for bail. (Paras 9, 23)
Facts of the case:
A violent protest occurred on 11.08.2020 at K.G.Halli police station demanding the arrest of an individual, turning the gathering into an unlawful assembly resulting in significant property damage and injury to police. The appellant was charged after an investigation by the NIA indicating his involvement in the violent acts.
Findings of Court:
Evidence, including witness statements and mobile records, established the appellant's participation in significant criminal conduct during the unlawful assembly.
Issues: Whether the evidence presented establishes reasonable grounds for believing the accusations against the appellant are prima facie true, and whether the bail application should be granted or upheld.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reinforced the principle that under the UAP Act, denial of bail is warranted if prima facie evidence suggests the accused's involvement in terrorism-related activities.
Result: Appeal and bail application dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts leading to appeal and involvement of accused. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments by appellant's counsel on bail application. (Para 6) |
| 3. arguments presented by nia prosecutor. (Para 7) |
| 4. court's analysis and consideration of bail. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. provisions of uap act governing bail applications. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 6. case analysis and reference to legal precedents. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 7. court's evaluation of evidence and witness statements. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 8. final conclusion on the rejection of bail and assessment of appeal. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the accused No.7 under Section 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') challenging the order dated 02.11.2023 passed by the XLIX Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, (Special Court for Trial of NIA cases) at Bengaluru in Spl.C.No.141/2021 and further prayer to grant bail to the appellant.
2. Brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that on 11.08.2020 around 8.45 p.m. a group of 25-30 persons gathered in front of Kadagondanahalli police station (hereinafter referred to as the 'K.G.Halli police station') and started shouting slogans demanding the arrest of one Naveen, nephew of Sri.Akanda Srinivasa Murthy, MLA who had posted derogatory message on his facebook account against Prophet Mohammad. Under the leadership of Syed Ikramuddin, others entered K.G.Halli police station demanding for registration of FIR against Naveen and others. Police received the complaint and registered NCR No.384/2020 for the purpose of conducting preliminary enquiry as D.J.Halli police had already registered the crime against Naveen for the said incident as FIR No.195/2020. The said fact had also been informed to the complainant and others who had come to the K.G.Halli police station.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that the gathering in front of K.G.Halli police station started increasing gradually, became violent considering the violent situation which had already erupted at D.J.Halli police station area. On 11.08.2020 at around 9 p.m., the Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru City, imposed curfew under the limits of D.J.Halli and K.G.Halli police stations with a view to control and avoid public gathering. K.G.Halli police made a public announcement of imposition of curfew. However, the gathering did not heed to the announcement and started mobilizing more people in front of the K.G.Halli police station. The assembly became unlawful, mob turned unruly and intensified their protest by shouting slogans which turned to violent activities. They started pelting stones on K.G.Halli police station, attacked police personnel on duty as well as innocent public who came to the aid of police. The mob carrying stones, iron rods, wooden sticks, improvised petrol bombs and other weapons became more violent and started vendalising, burning Government vehicles as well as private vehicles parked near the K.G.Halli police station. The mob demanded handing over of Naveen to them as they wanted to kill him. The police made their best efforts to control the mob. However, the aggressive mob was not ready to obey the orders of law enforcement agency. They entered the police station premises with deadly weapons and petrol filled in improvised plastic covers and bottles and continued attacking K.G.Halli police station. The mob created horrifying and terror situation in the area. The police resorted to lathi charge and subsequently police fired tear gases. However, the situation could not be controlled. The mob became more aggressive, started attacking police personnel on duty, the Government and public properties on a large scale were set ablaze and injury was caused to the police personnel on duty. The police, in order to curb the unlawful act of the gathering and after warning over the public announcement system, fired two rounds in the air with their service weapons to disburse the mob. However, the members of t
