Patna High Court Rejects Bail Plea of Anwar Rashid in Terror Funding Case

Court Cites Overwhelming Evidence of Association with Proscribed Organizations and Threats to National Security

In a significant judgment delivered by the Patna High Court, the bail application of Anwar Rashid was dismissed amidst serious allegations of his involvement with proscribed terrorist organizations and activities threatening national security. The Division Bench comprising Justices Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Sourendra Pandey denied relief citing substantial evidence supporting the charges against Rashid under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

Anwar Rashid, accused of having connections with banned groups such as SIMI and PFI, faced allegations of raising funds for terrorist activities and aiding convicted terrorists financially. The court found the accusations prima facie true, invoking the rigors of Section 43D(5) of the UA(P) Act, which restricts bail in cases with reasonable grounds of perceived threat to national security.

The prosecution's case against Rashid was built on evidence collected during investigations by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), revealing Rashid's role in forming secret groups to advance PFI's agenda of establishing Islamic rule in India. The NIA's third supplementary chargesheet detailed Rashid's financial transactions with convicted terrorists and his association with several high-profile terror cases, including the Aurangabad Arms Haul and the Mumbai 26/11 attacks.

Despite the appellant's plea for bail citing parity with co-accused who have been released, the court found Rashid's case distinctly severe due to the incriminating materials seized from his premises. The court noted the duration of Rashid's incarceration-two and a half years-but emphasized that in matters concerning national security, the period of custody alone does not warrant bail.

The court urged for an expedited trial, advising the NIA to ensure the swift presentation of witnesses, and dismissed Rashid's appeal for bail, reinforcing its commitment to national security in the face of terrorism threats.

Bottom Line:

Bail application under UA(P) Act, 1967 - Rejected by court due to overwhelming evidence supporting accusations of association with proscribed organizations, financial assistance to convicted terrorists, and threats to national security.

Statutory provision(s): Section 43D(5) UA(P) Act, 1967, Sections 120, 120B, 121, 121A, 153A, 153B/34 IPC, Sections 10, 13, 17, 18, 20, 38, 39 UA(P) Act, Section 196 CrPC, Section 45(1) UA(P) Act.

Anwar Rashid v. Union Bank of India, (Patna)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2811633