Read Time: 07 minutes
High Court noted that the charge sheet against the accused contained the material to hold that there were reasonable grounds for believing that the accusations against him were prima facie true and it was not open for him to reagitate the same point again when the findings on prima facie materials remained unchallenged and attained the finality.
The Karnataka High Court has said any member of the terrorist gang or any individual who is concerned with a terrorist act and has done anything in aid of such act would be covered under the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, even if he is not the actual perpetrator of the terrorist act and is not a member of banned organisation.
A bench of Justices K S Mudagal and Ramachandra D Huddar also said,that the person committing the offences must be the member of a terrorist organisation or an informal group or "gang".
"As per the provisions, it is sufficient if a person raises or provides funds, participates in conspiracy, organises the terrorist camps to aid the terrorist acts directly or indirectly. Any act preparatory to the commission of terrorist act is also punishable," the bench said.
The court dwelt upon the legal provisions while dismissing bail plea by Zabiulla alias Zabibulla, who was alleged to be a member of Al-Hind organisation and propagated the ideology of the proscribed terrorist organization ISIS.
The National Investigation Agency which took up the probe on January 22, 2021 in the initial FIR lodged by the Bengaluru police on January 10, 2021, alleged that the accused persons conspired to collect arms and explosives for murdering Hindu leaders and police officers thereby creating communal riots. The accused recruited vulnerable Muslim youths with intention to carry out terrorist attacks in South India especially in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu.
The petitioner through his counsel S Balan contended that to attract the charges under Sections 17, 18, 18A, 209 and 39 of UAP Act, either the appellant should have committed a terrorist act or should have been member of terrorist organisation as contemplated under Section 2(k) & (m) read with Section 15 of the UAP Act. Al-Hind organization to which the appellant allegedly belonged to was not an organisation enlisted in First Schedule of the UAP Act as banned outfits, therefore UAP Act does not apply, he added.
Standing counsel for the NIA Prasanna Kumar K, on the contrary, submitted that the interpretation that to attract the UAP Act, one should be the member of terrorist organisation, is wholly misconceived. Even though Al-Hind was not proscribed organisation, it had the links with ISIS a proscribed organisation and is aiding and supporting the activities of ISIS. Al-Hind though not enlisted terrorist organisation, but is a terrorist gang, he said.
Section 15 of UAP Act does not speak of commission of acts of terrorism only by the terrorist organisation, but it refers to any individual committing such acts. Sections 17, 18, 18A of UAP Act are independent of Section 39 of UAP Act, he pointed out.
Going through the provisions of the law, the bench said those showed that an informal body of individuals is also covered under the definition. That need not be necessarily involved in terrorist act as defined in Section 15. It is enough even if such gang is concerned with the terrorist act.
"There is no merit in the contention that to invoke Section 43D(5) of the UAP Act the accused being a member of a terrorist organisation or involving in the violent acts of causing death or injury to any person or persons or destruction of any property by using the explosives, fire arms or lethal weapons etc is a precondition," the bench said.
Case Title: ZABIULLA @ ZABIBULLA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA
Please Login or Register
