Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court on Monday denied bail to Mohd. Amir Javed, an accused under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) 1967, for his alleged involvement in planning terrorist activities in India.

A division bench comprising Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Anish Dayal refused the bail citing a reasonable possibility that Javed might have “played a crucial role within a network of individuals” with knowledge of a plot to initiate terrorist activities involving explosives and potential loss of life.

“Having considered the charge-sheet, the totality of the material based on broad probability regarding the involvement of the accused, the documents put forward by the investigating agency, as they were, and in addition pursuant to a surface analysis of probative value, this Court is of the opinion that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against the appellant is prima facie true. Consequently, the conditions in Section 43D (5) UAPA stand satisfied. The appeal is accordingly dismissed”, the court ordered.

The bench said that the determination of whether Javed was the weakest link or a substantial part of this network would be established during the trial. Therefore, at this stage, the court believed that releasing him on bail would not be appropriate.

Javed was detained in connection with this case on September 14, 2021, and he had been so for roughly 20 months. When his application for bail was filed earlier this year, he argued that during this time, he hadn't been released.

Javed's appeal against the trial court's order from May 18 denying him regular bail was dismissed, and the court upheld the ruling.

The FIR was registered based on a reliable input received regarding a terror module planning a serial Improvised Explosive Device (IED) Blasts. As per the input, a group of entities was planning to undertake serial IED Blasts in India for which these multiple IEDs were arranged from unknown sources and apparently at an advance stage of preparation.

“It was suspected that an Okhla, Delhi based entity was an important part of this module having associates in various parts of the country including Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra. This input was verified and corroborated through different sources and it emerged that a deep rooted conspiracy had been hatched by the terror module with its operatives in India to carry out the blasts”, the police stated.

As per the State, a multi-pronged operation was launched, several teams were stationed at Mumbai and Lucknow, Prayagraj, Rae Bareilly, Pratapgarh in Uttar Pradesh simultaneously. On 14th September 2021, on the basis of intelligence gathered, simultaneous raids were carried out in different States.

“Initially, Jan Mohammed Sheikh @ Sameer Kalia was apprehended in the Golden Temple Train by a team from Kota, Rajasthan while on way to Delhi; thereafter, Osama @ Sami was apprehended from Okhla, Delhi; Mohammad Abu Bakar was apprehended from Sarai Kale Khan, Delhi; Zeeshan Qamar was apprehended from Prayagraj, U.P. and the appellant was apprehended from Lucknow, U.P. Consignment of two IEDs, two hand-grenades and two pistols alongwith rounds were recovered after the arrest of accused Zeeshan, at his instance”, the court noted in its order.

It further noted that “another team apprehended Moolchandra @ Saaju @ Lala from Rae Bareilly, U.P. and later, accused Humaidur Rehman was arrested on 18th September, 2021. On the disclosure of accused Humaidur Rehman, two pistols were recovered from a small trench in a village area of Prayagraj at his instance”.

The court said that a preliminary analysis of the evidence presented by the prosecution indicated that Javed faced serious charges related to conspiracy and possession of IEDs, as well as other arms and ammunition, including grenades and pistols, for alleged terror activities.

It said that the investigation revealed a vast conspiracy involving multiple individuals working for terror modules with the intention of executing bomb blasts in India.

Javed was deemed an integral part of the recovery of arms and explosives, which, prima facie, did not warrant his release on bail at this stage, the court further said.

Case Title: Mohd. Amir Javed v. State (NCT of Delhi)