30-day Custody Bail Granted By Delhi HC To UAPA Accused Farhan Ansari Suse For Treatment In Private Hospital

A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Vikas Mahajan passed the order while hearing Suse’s appeal against the August 1 order of the Patiala House Court, which had rejected his interim bail plea on medical grounds.

Suse is an accused in a case registered by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in November 2023 concerning alleged extortion and support for the activities of ISIS.

The High Court noted that Suse requires surgery for an umbilical hernia and has been receiving treatment at Deen Dayal Upadhyay Hospital. He had sought permission to undergo treatment at a private hospital in Mumbai.

The Bench, however, declined to permit treatment in Mumbai, observing that it was “not considered feasible at this stage” in view of the alleged network attributed to Suse in Padgha and neighbouring areas of Maharashtra.

The Court held that the reasons for seeking treatment at a particular private hospital need not be examined, observing that a medically unwell accused cannot be prevented from undergoing treatment at a private hospital at his own expense.

Accordingly, the Bench permitted Suse to undergo treatment at any private hospital of his choice in Delhi-NCR while remaining in custody.

The Court directed that Suse would be granted custody bail for 30 days from the date of his admission to the private hospital. The expenses of his treatment will have to be borne by him.

The Court also imposed restrictions on his communication during the period.

Suse has been directed not to communicate or meet any relatives, friends or acquaintances, either through mobile communication or otherwise. He has also been restrained from communicating, directly or indirectly, with any person named in the chargesheet.

NIA allegations against Suse

Suse had approached the High Court through advocate Saipan Dastgir Sheikh challenging the trial court’s order.

The NIA has chargesheeted him in the case under Sections 120B and 387 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 13, 18, 18A, 20, 38 and 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

The agency filed its chargesheet on March 21, 2024, followed by the first supplementary chargesheet on June 3, 2024.

According to the first supplementary chargesheet, Suse and other co-accused were allegedly involved in a conspiracy with Saquib Nachan, who the NIA alleged was operating for ISIS in India. Nachan has since died.

The NIA has further alleged that Suse circulated messages on behalf of ISIS, took an oath of allegiance to the organisation and collected substantial amounts of cash from businessmen in Padgha, Maharashtra, allegedly to support ISIS.

The agency has also alleged that a group of individuals, including co-accused in the case, was involved in spreading ISIS-related messages, taking oaths on behalf of the organisation and raising funds in the Padgha area.

The NIA has claimed that the group had a larger network and described Suse as one of the alleged prime conspirators associated with Saquib Nachan.

Defence submissions

Senior counsel appearing for Suse submitted that the principal allegation against him was extortion and that his alleged connection with ISIS was yet to be established at trial.

The defence also submitted that more than 500 witnesses are yet to be examined and that Suse has already spent approximately two years and nine months in custody.

Opposing the plea, NIA counsel Asmita Singh submitted that Suse was an active member of ISIS in India.

The High Court, while allowing the limited medical relief, restricted the treatment to Delhi-NCR and imposed conditions on Suse’s communication and contact with others.

Case Title: Farhan Ansari Suse v. National Investigating Agency

Bench: Justices Prathiba M Singh and Vikas Mahajan

Order Date: September 17, 2026