Bombay High Court: In a matter where the appellants (‘accused persons’) was charged for the offence under the provisions of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (‘UAPA’), the Division Bench comprising of Nitin B. Suryawanshi* and Sandipkumar C. More, JJ granted bail to the accused and observed that the Popular Front of India Organization (‘PFI’) was not a banned organisation when the FIR was lodged. The Court stated that merely because the accused persons participated in meetings, seminars or physical training of karate etc., prima facie, it cannot be said that they have indulged in any terrorist act.
Background
The Assistant Police Inspector of Anti-Terrorism Squad, Aurangabad had received a secret information that near Jama Masjid of Chikalthana, training of karate was arranged for Muslim youths. At that place a banner of “Healthy People Healthy Nation” was displayed. In the said program, Secretary of PFI, had given a speech propagating that Muslims in India are being subjected to mob lynching and Central Government is attacking Muslim people through Hindu organizations. Similar program was held by PFI at Samosa Ground, Aurangabad where the District President of PFI and General Secretary were present. They stated in their speeches that present period is difficult for Muslim community andIndian Government is daily conspiring against Muslims. Therefore, with a view to resist the Indian Government with arms they were conducting camps, in order to make the Muslim youth, the members of PFI.
As per the information, PFI had arranged arms and physical training at a hall in front of Masjid-a-Mansab Mir where District President of PFI and other followers of PFI were present. It was found out that in the said workshop Muslim youths were trained and encouraged to fight against Indian Government with arms and might to protect Muslim religion. It is also alleged that Managing Committee members of PFI including the accused gave hate speeches, propagating that Central Government is implementing laws which are against Muslim religion.
On 14-8-2022 a get together of Ulema was held under the campaign “Save The Republic” where speeches were given creating discontent and disaffection against the Central Government. A fake narrative was propagated that through NRC, Muslim community is being harassed and by the violent action 20 Lakh Muslim community people are tried to be killed. They were expressing their intention to establish new Government based on Sharia law and for that purpose they are encouraging Muslim youths to store arms and if necessary, aid can be taken from other countries.
Hence, an FIR was registered for offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(b) of the UAPA, under Sections 121-A, 153-A, 120-B, 109, 116, 201 of the Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 4 read with Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 and under Section 135 of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. Pursuant to the registration of crime, the accused were arrested. During investigation, material connecting ISIS was allegedly found with accused persons, andon completion of investigation charge sheet was filed by prosecution in the month of February 2023.
Accused therefore, preferred bail application before the Additional Sessions Judge, which got rejected, thus, they approached the present Court under Section 21 of National Investigating Agency Act, 2008.
Analysis, Law and Decision
The Court observed that when the FIR was lodged on 21-9-2022 and accused persons were arrested on 22-9-2022 and PFI was banned for a period of five years by Government of India by Gazette Notification dated 28-9-2022. Therefore, PFI was not declared a terrorist organization within the meaning of Section 2(m) of UAPA when the FIR was lodged or when the accused were arrested, and so, PFI also was not mentioned in the first schedule of UAPA at that point of time.
Furthermore, it was observed by the Court that, the allegations against the accused persons were that they gave hate speeches propagating that Central Government is implementing CAA, NRC, Hijab Ban, Triple Talaq Ban, which are against Muslim religion and their statements created unrest, discontent and incited the mob. 311 videos in one memory card and 1394 images of hate speeches and mob-lynching were found with the accused. The Court noted that weapons like sword, rampuri knife, fighter along with book against judicial system and electronic gadgets were also recovered from one of the accused. However, even though weapons are recovered from one of the accused, it is not the prosecution’s case that those weapons were used for any terrorist activity and/or toppling the Government.
The Court opined that there are no reasonable grounds for believing that accusations against the accused are true, therefore, mandate contained in proviso to Section 43(D)(5) of UAPA would not be applicable to the case of accused. Additionally, it was noted that Section 13(1)(b) prescribes maximum punishment of 7 years, out of which the accused persons have already undergone 2 years and 8 months imprisonment. Further, since there appears no likelihood of trial being concluded in the near future, that was also a ground for consideration for the grant of bail.
Accordingly, relying on Athar Parwez v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3762 and Vernon v. State of Maharashtra, (2023) 15 SCC 56, the Court released the accused on bail on appropriate terms and conditions, and held that merely because the accused persons participated in meetings, seminars or physical training of karate etc., prima facie, it cannot be said that they were indulging in the terrorist activities, in the absence of any overt act of violation.
[Sayyad Faisal Sayyad Khaleel v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 2775, decided on 7-7-2025]
*Judgement authored by- Justice Nitin B. Suryawanshi
Advocates who appeared in this case:
Advocate for the Appellants- Javed R. Shaih , N.R. Shaikh, Advocates
Advocate for the Respondents- Kalpalata Patil Bharaswadkar, APP
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
With such orders law is actually turing biased and time and again this is evident why the faith in Indian judiciary is shaken.