Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Jyoti Jagtap, was arrested as accused No. 15 in FIR No. RC-01/2020/NIA/MUM registered by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAP Act). The case arose from the Elgaar Parishad event held on 31.12.2017 at Shaniwarwada, Pune, which was followed by violence on 01.01.2018 during the Bhima Koregaon Shaurya Din celebrations. The NIA alleged that the appellant was part of a larger conspiracy to commit terrorist acts and to wage war against the State. The appellant filed a bail application before the Special Judge, Greater Bombay, which was rejected on 14.02.2022. She then appealed under Section 21(4) of the NIA Act before the Bombay High Court. The main legal issues were whether the bar under Section 43D(5) of the UAP Act applied, and whether there was prima facie evidence of the appellant's involvement in a criminal conspiracy or terrorist act. The appellant argued that she was merely a social activist who attended meetings and shared posts on social media, with no direct involvement in any violent act. The NIA contended that her participation in meetings and sharing of inflammatory material showed her complicity. The court analyzed the evidence, including call data records, social media posts, and witness statements, and found no material to show that the appellant was part of any conspiracy or that she committed any terrorist act. The court held that the bar under Section 43D(5) does not apply when the accusations are not prima facie true. It distinguished between mere presence and active participation in a conspiracy. The court also noted that the appellant was a woman and had been in custody for over two years. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the trial court's order, and granted bail to the appellant on certain conditions.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Bail - Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 - Section 43D(5) - Prima Facie Case - The court considered whether the bar under Section 43D(5) of UAP Act applies when the accusations against the accused are not prima facie true. Held that the bar does not operate if there is no prima facie material to show the accused's involvement in a terrorist act or conspiracy. (Paras 20-30) B) Criminal Law - Conspiracy - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 120B - Meeting of Minds - Mere attendance at meetings or sharing of social media posts does not establish a criminal conspiracy unless there is evidence of an agreement to commit an illegal act. Held that the appellant's presence at meetings and sharing of posts, without more, does not constitute conspiracy. (Paras 31-40) C) Criminal Law - Terrorist Act - Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 - Section 15 - Definition - The term 'terrorist act' under Section 15 requires an act that threatens the unity, integrity, security, or sovereignty of India. Held that the appellant's alleged acts of sharing posts and attending meetings do not fall within the definition of a terrorist act. (Paras 41-50) D) Criminal Law - Bail - National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 - Section 21(4) - Appeal against rejection of bail - The court has the power to grant bail if the trial court's order is perverse or based on no evidence. Held that the trial court's rejection of bail was unsustainable as there was no prima facie case against the appellant. (Paras 51-60)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant, accused No. 15 in a case under the UAP Act and IPC, is entitled to bail under Section 21(4) of the NIA Act, considering the bar under Section 43D(5) of the UAP Act and the absence of prima facie evidence of her involvement in a criminal conspiracy or terrorist act.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 14.02.2022 passed by the Special Judge, Greater Bombay is set aside. The appellant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one or more sureties, subject to conditions including not tampering with evidence, not leaving the country without permission, and appearing before the trial court as required.
Law Points
- Bail under UAP Act
- Prima facie case
- Conspiracy
- Terrorist act
- Section 43D(5) UAP Act
- Section 21(4) NIA Act
- Standard of proof for bail
- Role of accused
- Social media posts
- Meetings
- Evidence of conspiracy
