Court Cites Prolonged Incarceration and Absence of Stringent Conditions under UAPA as Grounds for Bail
In a significant judgment, the Bombay High Court has granted bail to Mohd. Iqbal Ibrahim Khan, who was arrested under charges of being a member of the banned organization, Popular Front of India (PFI), and other offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The division bench comprising Justices Sarang V. Kotwal and Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale emphasized the prolonged detention without trial and the absence of charges under specific stringent sections of the UAPA as key reasons for granting bail.
The appellant, Mohd. Iqbal Ibrahim Khan, has been in custody since September 22, 2022, following his arrest under allegations of conspiracy and incitement against the government. However, the court noted that no charges were framed under Chapter IV or VI of the UAPA, which are essential to invoke the stringent bail conditions under Section 43D(5) of the Act. The bench highlighted the limited role ascribed to Khan and the unlikelihood of the trial concluding soon, given that 255 witnesses are cited, with at least 90 proposed to be examined.
The court also considered the nature of the evidence against Khan, which included photographs and videos found on his devices. The judges observed that while a video related to petrol bombs was found, there was no evidence to suggest Khan forwarded it or used it for incitement. Other materials were deemed innocuous, portraying activities such as physical training and community service, which did not fulfill the ingredients of the alleged offences.
The decision to grant bail was also influenced by precedents set by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in similar cases involving PFI members, where bail was granted under comparable circumstances. The High Court concluded that Khan's continued detention was unwarranted and ordered his release on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000, with conditions to prevent tampering with evidence and ensure cooperation in the trial.
Bottom Line:
Bail granted to the accused under UAPA as the stringent conditions under Section 43D(5) were not applicable in the absence of charges under Chapter IV or VI of UAPA, and due to prolonged incarceration, limited role ascribed to him, and unlikely conclusion of trial in a reasonable time.
Statutory provision(s): National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 Section 21(4), Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 Sections 43D(5), 13(1)(b), Indian Penal Code Sections 120-B, 121-A, 153-A, 201, 109, 116.
Mohd. Iqbal Ibrahim Khan v. State of Maharashtra, (Bombay)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2969180
