Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

In a significant decision, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court has rejected the bail pleas of two Rajasthan residents accused of aiding a pro-Khalistani conspiracy to conduct reconnaissance of the Ram Janmabhoomi temple premises in Ayodhya ahead of the consecration ceremony in January this year.

The division bench of Justices Sangeeta Chandra and Shree Prakash Singh dismissed the criminal appeals filed by Pradeep Kumar alias Pradeep Poonia and Ajit Kumar Sharma, who are facing prosecution under stringent charges including conspiracy to wage war against the State (Section 121A IPC) and forgery (Sections 467, 468 IPC), among others.

According to the Uttar Pradesh Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), the duo had travelled with co-accused Shankar Lal Dusad to Ayodhya on January 17, 2024, allegedly to carry out a recce of the Ram temple area. The prosecution claimed this was done in preparation for hoisting Khalistani flags on the day of the Pran Pratishtha ceremony, January 22, which was attended by the Prime Minister and other dignitaries.

The ATS's claim is that Dusad, a former jail inmate, came in contact with Khalistani terrorists including Sukhwinder Singh alias Sukkha and Sikhs for Justice leader Gurpatwant Singh Pannu. It is alleged that Pannu directed the operation remotely, tasking Dusad with assembling a team and gathering logistical support for a symbolic show of separatist propaganda at the site.

Court noted that a forged vehicle registration certificate and multiple Aadhaar cards were recovered from the Scorpio car the accused were using. A map of Ayodhya was also found under the vehicle seat. Call Detail Records showed Pradeep Kumar had contacted Dusad 273 times, while Ajit Sharma had contacted him 23 times. Both claimed they were simply pilgrims looking for accommodation.

Senior Advocate I.B. Singh, appearing for the appellants, argued that the accused were innocent co-travellers and no direct link to Khalistani operatives had been established. He further asserted that the case was built largely on unsubstantiated confessional statements and circumstantial inferences.

However, the court found that the trial court had applied its mind appropriately while rejecting the initial bail applications and had relied on prima facie material. The high court noted the the trial court had prima facie held that till the date of decision of the bail application(s) sufficient material had been collected by the ATS and it could not be said that the appellants were falsely implicated.

Accordingly, the high court dismissed the appeals and rejected the bail pleas.

Case Title: Pradeep Kumar @ Pradeep Poonia Vs State of UP and connected matter