Delhi HC Holds PFI’s Plea Against UAPA Tribunal Order Upholding Centre’s 5-Year Ban Maintainable

The Delhi High Court on Monday, October 13, held maintainable a petition filed by the Popular Front of India (PFI) challenging the UAPA Tribunal’s decision that had upheld the five-year ban imposed on the organisation by the Central Government.

The PFI had approached the High Court assailing the Tribunal’s order dated March 21, 2024, which affirmed the Centre’s notification declaring the organisation an unlawful association under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA).

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, in its verdict today, said, "In view of the aforesaid, we hold that this Court has jurisdiction to entertain and maintain a petition under Article 226 against an order of the Tribunal passed under Section 4 of the Act."

Issuing notice to Centre, the Court added, "We thus hold the instant petition to be maintainable. Issue notice. Counter within six weeks; two weeks for rejoinder."

The matter will next be heard on 20 January 2025

On 14 July 2025, Court had reserved its order on the maintainability of a petition filed by the Popular Front of India (PFI) challenging the UAPA Tribunal’s decision upholding the five-year ban on the organisation. 

Appearing before a division bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, counsel for PFI argued on the maintainability of the petition. The Central Government, however, objected, contending that the Tribunal’s decision, delivered by a sitting High Court judge, could not be challenged under Articles 226 or 227 of the Constitution.

Contesting this, counsel for PFI had argued that this Court had previously held that a writ under Article 226 is maintainable. He submitted that the order passed by the Tribunal is amenable to the jurisdiction of the High Court. He further contended that the Tribunal constituted under Section 5 of the UAPA is a separate entity. While it does exercise judicial power, the mere fact of such power does not exclude the availability of jurisdiction under Article 226.

In the last hearing, ASG S.V. Raju argued that the plea was not maintainable and that the only remedy available was under Article 136 of the Constitution, which the petitioner had already invoked before the Supreme Court. “The only remedy available here is under Article 136 of the Constitution, and the respondent has already approached the Supreme Court as well,” ASG added On the other hand, counsel for PFI opposed the arguments made by the Central Government.

On 6 November 2023, the Supreme Court dismissed an SLP filed by the Popular Front of India (PFI) challenging the Central Government’s decision to impose a 5-year ban on it and its eight affiliated fronts. PFI's plea challenged the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) Tribunal presided by Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma's order, which "upheld" the Central Government’s decision.

Centre Imposed Ban On September 28, 2022, the Central Government, in the exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, declared the Popular Front of India (PFI) and the other eight alleged affiliated fronts as ‘unlawful associations’.

The fronts, including Rehab India Foundation (RIF), Campus Front of India (CFI), All India Imams Council (AIIC), National Confederation of Human Rights Organization (NCHRO), National Women’s Front, Junior Front, Empower India Foundation, and Rehab Foundation, Kerala, were banned for five years.

To trace the history, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) carried out massive operations and raids in several states to track down people involved in the outfit.

The Gazette by the Ministry of Home Affairs had put forth, “they have been pursuing a secret agenda to radicalize a particular section of the society working towards undermining the concept of democracy and show sheer disrespect towards the constitutional authority and constitutional set up of the country.”

It had further stated that the PFI indulged in such unlawful activities that were prejudicial to the integrity, sovereignty, and security of the country and could potentially disturb communal harmony.

PFIs linkages were established by two proscribed organizations, the Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI), and Jamat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB).

Case Title: Popular Front of India vs Union of India

Judgment Date: 28 August 2025

Bench: Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya, Justice Tushar Rao Gedela