{"id":268002,"date":"2022-06-06T13:00:07","date_gmt":"2022-06-06T07:30:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=268002"},"modified":"2022-06-10T12:10:16","modified_gmt":"2022-06-10T06:40:16","slug":"merely-smuggling-of-gold-without-any-connection-to-threat-to-economic-security-of-india-amount-terrorist-act-delhi-high-court-law-legal-news-legal-updates","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/06\/merely-smuggling-of-gold-without-any-connection-to-threat-to-economic-security-of-india-amount-terrorist-act-delhi-high-court-law-legal-news-legal-updates\/","title":{"rendered":"Can merely smuggling of gold without any connection to threat to economic security of India amount to terrorist act? Read what Del HC says"},"content":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court:<\/strong> While granting bail to men accused of smuggling gold, the Division Bench of Mukta Gupta and Mini Pushkarna, JJ., expressed that, the mere smuggling of gold without any connection to a threat to the economic security or monetary stability of the country is not a \u201cterrorist act\u201d under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act<\/p>\n

Aggrieved by the impugned order declining to grant bail to the appellants in a case registered under Sections 16\/18\/20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and under Sections 120B\/204\/409\/471 of Penal Code, 1860 at NIA Headquarters, appellants preferred the present appeals.<\/p>\n

\n

Factual Matrix<\/span><\/h4>\n
\n<\/blockquote>\n

Appellants except appellant Vaibhav Sampat More were intercepted by the Delhi Zonal Unit of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence while travelling from Assam, Guwahati to Delhi and it was alleged that 504 gold bars weighing 83.621 kilograms, which were smuggled and recovered at New Delhi Railway Station.<\/p>\n

After the DRI carried out its investigation RC was registered by the National Investigation Agency for alleged commission of criminal conspiracy, furthering terrorist activities and also threatening the economic security and damaging the monetary stability of India as provided under Section \u00a0\u00a015(1) (a) (iii a) of UAP Act being a terrorist act punishable under Section 16 of the UAP Act.<\/p>\n

Additional Solicitor General took the Court to the statement of objects and reasons of the Amendment Act which showed that the amendment was made to the definition of \u201cterrorist act\u201d by bringing in facets of terrorist acts by disturbing the economic stability of the country.<\/p>\n

The above-said amendment had been made pursuant to the recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force.<\/p>\n

Even though the report specifically dealt with gold, the word \u2018gold\u2019 was not added while amending Section 15(1) (iiia) UAP Act.<\/p>\n

Further possession, use, production, transfer of counterfeit currency or coin is per-se illegal and an offence, however, production, possession, use etc. of \u201cgold\u201f is not per-se illegal or an offence. Even import of gold is not prohibited but restricted subject to prescribed quantity on payment of duty.<\/p>\n

\n

Thus, mere smuggling of gold without any connection whatsoever to threatening India’s economic security or monetary stability cannot be a terrorist act.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In the present case, Bench noted that since no death had been caused, Clause \u2018b\u2019 of Section 16 of UAP Act won\u2019t be applicable which provided for sentence of minimum imprisonment for a period of 5 years which may extend to life imprisonment from 5 years to life based on the facts of the case.<\/p>\n

In view of the above discussion, bail was granted to the appellants. The following conditions were laid down:<\/p>\n