Read Time: 06 minutes
Khan’s case came to light during an investigation that culminated in the arrests of several individuals, including Kashmiri businessman Zahoor Watali. He was arrested in July 2017 and has remained in judicial custody since August of the same year. He was charged with sections under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
A division bench of the Delhi High Court on Tuesday listed three matters, including the bail application of jailed separatist leader, Nayeem Ahmad Khan, for 21st October, 2024. The court did not agree with the counsel for the petitioner’s request for an immediate hearing.
According to the National Investigative Agency (NIA), Khan had “created unrest” in the Kashmir valley. He was allegedly involved in a larger criminal conspiracy, indulging in activities such as “pelting stones on security forces” and “systematically burning schools”. He was also accused of causing damage to public property and waging war on India.
In December 2022, Khan sought bail in a Delhi trial court, but his plea was dismissed. Special Judge Shailender Malik, while dismissing his application, stated that “there was prima facie evidence" against him. The judge further noted that there was sufficient evidence available on record raising "grave suspicion” of Khan’s involvement in the various offences which he was charged with.
Subsequently, the terror accused approached the Delhi High Court, challenging the trial court order which had denied his bail plea. In February 2023, a division bench of the Delhi HC, comprising Justices Siddharth Mridul and Talwant Singh, issued notice to the NIA. The court sought the agency’s response to the plea filed by Khan. The matter was then listed for further hearing on March 23 of the same year.
Notably, Khan has political affiliations. He was a member of the All Parties Hurriyat Conference, (APHC), a Kashmir - based organization, that describes itself as “a union of political, social and religious parties".
In 2023, a trial court order directing the attachment of the Hurriyat’s Srinagar office was challenged by Nayeem Ahmad Khan in the Delhi HC. The court granted time to the NIA to respond to this plea. The bench, comprising Justices Siddharth Mridul and Anish Dayal said, “NIA seeks time to file a reply to this application. Is granted three weeks from today, list after 4 weeks.”
However, defending Khan’s stance on this issue, Advocate Tara Narula, asserted, “I am accused in a UAPA case and I co-own property. I am alleged to be one of the 5 co-owners of the property, the other 4 co-owners are not accused in the trial. That property has been attached on an application by the prosecution (NIA) which I would contend is not maintainable and the attachment has been ordered though that property does not constitute proceeds of terrorism and the prosecution claims that it was not intended to be used for terrorism”.
In the latest hearing of this matter on Thursday, Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra sought more time to argue the case.
Although it was initially listed for 8th October, Mr. Luthra requested a later date of hearing, citing his unavailability due to family commitments. The matter was then adjourned to 21st October 2024 by a bench comprising Justices Girish Kathpalia and Suresh Kumar Kait.
The case was listed along with two other matters. Mr. Luthra submitted before the court that he would argue on all three matters together since the substantial arguments for these were similar.
Case Title: Nayeem Ahmad Khan v National Investigative Agency
Please Login or Register
