Advertisement

  • News
  • Columns
  • Interviews
  • BW Communities
  • BW TV
  • Subscribe to Print
BW Businessworld

Delhi violence: Court dismisses bail plea of man arrested on terror charges

Delhi violence: Court dismisses bail plea of man arrested on terror charges

Photo Credit :

New Delhi [India], Aug 29 (ANI): A Delhi court has dismissed the bail plea of a man, who was arrested under terror charges in connection with north-east Delhi violence case, observing that there is a prima facie evidence against the accused.
Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat dismissed the bail plea of Faizan Khan on Friday.
"The case is at the stage of investigation and from the perusal of the case diary and the statements... along with the Whatsapp chats, it can be inferred at this stage that there is a prima facie evidence against the accused and thus, the embargo under Section 43D (5) Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, (UAPA) 1967 is attracted in this case," the order said.
According to Section 43D (5) Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, no person accused of an offence punishable under Chapters IV and V of this Act shall, if in custody, be released on bail or on his own bond unless the public prosecutor has been given an opportunity of being heard on the application for such release.
"In view of the above discussion, at this stage, I do not find any reason to grant bail to the accused/applicant Faizan Khan. Consequently, the bail application of applicant/accused Faizan Khan stands dismissed," the court noted adding that investigation is still pending.
"In terms of the provisions of Section 43 of UAPA 1967, it is clear that the accused shall not be released on bail if the court on the perusal of the case diaries or the report under Section 173 of Code is of the opinion that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against such person is prim facie true," the court added.
It said that the provisions for bail in UAPA cases is different from normal the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) provisions. "If the court forms an opinion that there are reasonable grounds for believing that accusation against the accused is prima facie true, then the accused shall not be released on bail," the court noted.
Khan was arrested in the present case on July 29 and currently undergoing judicial custody.
Defence counsel Azra argued on the bail application on behalf of accused Khan which was opposed by special public prosecutor Amit Prasad.
Defence counsel said that the accused, who worked as a worker in a telecom company is not part of any conspiracy to create any riots in Delhi and all the allegations against the accused are false and baseless.
As per the case of the prosecution, the case pertains to a multi-layered and preplanned conspiracy by blocking the roads and other places and other means in the garb of CAA protest and to create tension, inciting people, disturbing the law and order, etc leading to the riots.
The prosecution said that the riots resulted in the loss of lives and property by using firearms, petrol bombs, acid-bottles, stones, sling shots and other dangerous articles gathered at various places. Various groups and individuals coordinated and allegedly played their part in the said conspiracy, the prosecution added.
The Crime Branch of the Delhi Police had on March 6 registered an FIR under several sections of the India Penal Code (IPC) regarding a criminal conspiracy to cause communal riots in Delhi from February 23 to 26. On the same day, investigation of the case was transferred to the Special Cell. The investigating agency had on April 19 invoked Sections 13, 16, 17, and 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 in the case.
Besides Khan, Khalid, Ishrat Jahan, Tahir Hussain, Gufisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Natasha Narwal, Devangana Kalita, Asif Iqbal Tanha, and Shafa ur Rehman are among others arrested in the case and they are currently undergoing judicial custody.
At least 53 people lost their lives in the violence took place in February this year in the northeast area of Delhi between groups supporting and opposing the Citizenship Amendment Act. (ANI)

Disclaimer: The views expressed in the article above are those of the authors' and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of this publishing house. Unless otherwise noted, the author is writing in his/her personal capacity. They are not intended and should not be thought to represent official ideas, attitudes, or policies of any agency or institution.


ANI

ANI

More From The Author >>