Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Athar Parwez, was arrested on 12.07.2022 in connection with FIR No. 827/2022 registered at Police Station Phulwari Sharif, Patna, under various sections of IPC and later UAPA. The allegations stemmed from a raid on 11.07.2022 at Ahmad Palace, where a document titled 'India 2047 towards rule of Islam in India' was recovered. The appellant was an active member of PFI, which was banned later on 28.09.2022. The NIA took over investigation and filed a chargesheet on 07.01.2023 under IPC and UAPA sections. The appellant's bail application was dismissed by the Patna High Court on 28.11.2023. The Supreme Court granted leave and considered the appeal. The appellant argued that the seizure was suspicious, the document did not advocate terrorism, and he had no active role. The co-accused Jalaluddin Khan had been granted bail by the Supreme Court. The respondent argued that the appellant was involved in conspiracy, training, and fundraising for PFI. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case under UAPA, as the document did not promote terrorism or violence. The appellant's role was similar to that of the co-accused who was granted bail. Additionally, the appellant had been in custody for over two years and four months without charge framing, violating Article 21. The court allowed the appeal and granted bail subject to conditions.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Bail - Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 - Section 43D(5) - Prima Facie Case - The court considered whether the allegations and material on record make out a prima facie case against the appellant for offences under UAPA. Held that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case as the seized document did not advocate terrorism or violence, and the appellant's role was limited to participation in meetings and protests. (Paras 18-20) B) Criminal Law - Bail - Parity - Co-accused - The appellant's co-accused, Jalaluddin Khan, was granted bail by the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 3173 of 2024. The court found the appellant's role similar to that of the co-accused, and thus granted bail on parity. (Para 21) C) Constitutional Law - Right to Speedy Trial - Article 21 - The appellant was in custody since 12.07.2022 (over two years and four months) and charges had not been framed. The court held that continued detention without trial would violate Article 21. (Para 22)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant is entitled to bail under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, given the allegations and the stage of trial.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Appellant granted bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties. Conditions: not tamper with evidence, not influence witnesses, appear before trial court as directed, surrender passport, not leave India without permission, report to police station once a month.
Law Points
- Bail under UAPA
- Section 43D(5) UAPA
- Prima facie case
- Parity with co-accused
- Article 21
- Right to speedy trial
