A.M.KHANWILKAR, AJAY RASTOGI
NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY – Appellant
Versus
ZAHOOR AHMAD SHAH WATALI – Respondent
Ratio Decidendi:
Degree of satisfaction for bail under Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA): The court must record satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds for believing the accusation against the accused is prima facie true, which requires a lighter degree of satisfaction compared to that for discharge applications or framing of charges under UAPA. This involves assessing broad probabilities of involvement without elaborate examination or dissection of evidence. (!) [1000633130016][1000633130017]
Consideration of material for bail: The court must evaluate the totality of material gathered by the Investigating Agency, including the charge-sheet under Section 173 CrPC, case diary, accompanying documents, statements under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC (even if in sealed cover or redacted for protected witnesses), and other evidence presented, without analyzing individual pieces or discarding them on grounds of admissibility (which is for trial). The charge-sheet need not contain detailed evidence analysis. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) [1000633130017][1000633130018][1000633130019][1000633130020][1000633130027][1000633130030]
Approach at bail stage: No mini-trial or merits assessment; the court forms a prima facie opinion on the accusation's truth based on materials indicating complicity, including linkages, financial transactions, CDRs, witness statements, and seizure memos suggestive of terror funding/conspiracy. High Court erred by discarding key documents (e.g., D-132(a)) and statements, questioning genuineness prematurely. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) [1000633130017][1000633130018][1000633130023][1000633130028][1000633130034]
Application to facts: Given totality of evidence (e.g., documents showing foreign remittances from unknown sources, hawala linkages to Pakistan/terrorists, Hurriyat contacts via CDRs, witness statements), reasonable grounds exist to believe accusations of terror funding/conspiracy under UAPA Sections 13,16,17,18,20,38-40 r/w IPC Sections 120B,121,121A are prima facie true; bail rightly rejected by Designated Court, High Court order set aside. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) [1000633130023][1000633130024][1000633130025][1000633130026][1000633130027][1000633130028][1000633130036][1000633130037]
JUDGMENT :
A.M. Khanwilkar, J.
Leave granted.
2. The respondent is named as Accused No. 10 in the First Information Report dated 30th May, 2017, registered by the Officer-in-charge of Police Station, NIA, Delhi, for offences punishable under Sections 120B, 121 and 121A of the Indian Penal Code ("IPC") and Sections 13,16,17,18,20,38,39 and 40 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, (for short "the 1967 Act"). The respondent (Accused No. 10) filed an application for bail before the District and Sessions Judge, Special Court (NIA), New Delhi, which came to be rejected on 8th June, 2018. That order has been reversed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal Appeal No. 768/2018 vide order dated 13thSeptember, 2018. The High Court directed release of the respondent on bail subject to certain conditions. That decision is the subject matter of this appeal filed by the prosecuting agency - the appellant herein.
3. The Designated Court opined that there are serious allegations against the respondent Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali (Accused No. 10) of being involved in unlawful
Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. V.C. Shukla and Ors.
Chenna Boy anna Krishna Yadav Vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr
Gurcharan Singh v. State (Delhi Admn.)
Hitendra Vishnu Thakur and Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
Jayendra Saraswathi Swamigal v. State of T.N.
K. Veeraswami Vs. Union of India and Ors
Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan
Khoday Distilleries Ltd. and Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and Ors.
Niranjan Singh Karam Singh Punjabi, Advocate Vs. Jitendra Bhimraj Bijjaya and Ors
Ramchandra Keshav Adke (dead) by LRs. and Ors. Vs. Govind Joti Chavare and Ors
Ranjitsing Brahmajeetsing Sharma Vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr
Salim Khan Vs. Sanjai Singh and Anr
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.