Supreme Court Grants Bail in UAPA Case: Lack of Prima Facie Evidence Against Accused

The case of Jalaluddin Khan v. Union of India revolves around allegations under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967, and the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Supreme Court was called upon to decide whether the appellant should be granted bail after being charged with serious offenses, including conspiracy and supporting unlawful activities.

The appellant, a retired police constable, was accused of aiding and abetting the activities of the Popular Front of India (PFI), an organization allegedly involved in unlawful and anti-national activities. The case against him was based on his ownership of a building where PFI members were alleged to have conducted meetings and training sessions. However, the Supreme Court found that the prosecution had failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against him under the stringent provisions of UAPA, leading to his release on bail.

Arguments Presented

Appellant’s Arguments

The appellant contended that:

• There was no direct evidence linking him to the alleged unlawful activities of PFI.
• The primary accusation was based on the fact that his wife owned the building where PFI meetings took place, but there was no proof of his active involvement.
• The charges were primarily built on witness testimonies and circumstantial evidence, none of which established his complicity beyond a reasonable doubt.
• The delay in trial proceedings and prolonged incarceration justified his release on bail.

Respondent’s Arguments

The Union of India argued that:

• The appellant knowingly allowed his property to be used for activities that threatened national security.
• Confidential witness statements indicated that the appellant attended meetings where anti-national discussions took place.
• The appellant’s son allegedly received financial transactions from individuals associated with PFI, suggesting a direct connection.
• Granting bail could allow the appellant to tamper with evidence and influence witnesses.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court examined the material evidence and found significant inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case, concluding:

• There was no clear evidence proving the appellant’s involvement in any illegal activities beyond the ownership of the building.
• The key witness statements, relied upon by the prosecution, were found to be inconsistent and did not directly implicate the appellant.
• The financial transactions cited by the prosecution did not demonstrate a clear link between the appellant and PFI’s alleged unlawful activities.
• The legal threshold under Section 43D(5) of UAPA was not met, as there were no reasonable grounds to believe the accusations were prima facie true.

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court ruled that:

• The High Court’s order rejecting bail was set aside.
• The appellant was granted bail, subject to conditions, including surrendering his passport and reporting to the investigating officer regularly.
• The decision was based on the lack of prima facie evidence and the principle that bail should not be denied unless there is clear proof of active participation in the alleged offense.
• The findings in this bail order would not affect the trial proceedings.

This ruling reinforces the principle that the mere ownership of a property where alleged unlawful activities take place does not automatically implicate the owner in criminal acts. The decision highlights the importance of substantive evidence in cases under UAPA and safeguards the fundamental right to liberty.

Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/supreme-court-upholds-cheque-bounce-conviction-fine-increased-jail-term-waived-for-elderly-accused/

Petitioner Name: Jalaluddin Khan.
Respondent Name: Union of India.
Judgment By: Justice Abhay S. Oka, Justice Augustine George Masih.
Place Of Incident: Patna, Bihar.
Judgment Date: 12-08-2024.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: jalaluddin-khan-vs-union-of-india-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-12-08-2024.pdf