Read Time: 04 minutes

A Divison Bench of Mukta Gupta J. and Mini Pushkarna J. of the Delhi High Court, expressed concern over the lack of evidence collected by investigative agencies to link the gold smuggling activities of the accused to financing terrorism. 

When the court inquired as to what evidence had been shown to charge the accused with being part of a gang with international links conspiring to smuggle gold in India, the defendants claimed that there was none. 

Mr. Saurabh Kripal, appearing for UAPA accused Balkiran Rao Gaikwad, argued that there was no evidence to say that the gold came from Myanmar, much less, link the activities of the accused as having international linkages. He also referred to the recent  judgements of the Kerala High Court and Rajasthan High Court in similar gold smuggling cases, where the state sought to impose provisions of the UAPA upon the accused. 

Special Public Prosecutor, Mr. Rahul Tyagi, appearing for the National Investigation Agency, pointed out that the question of whether gold smuggling can invite charges under the UAPA, 1967 is sub judice before the Supreme Court of India. 

However, the court stated that though such a question was pending adjudication before a higher court, it would not mean that bail could not be granted to other persons under similar circumstances. 

The matter has now been put up for the May 24th. 

Background 

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) has recently filed a chargesheet against 11 accused in the New Delhi Railway Station Gold Smuggling Case. According to a statement by the NIA, the chargesheet is filed against Ravikiran Balaso Gaikwad, Pawan Kumar Khan Gaikwad,  Sachin Appaso Hasabe, Dileep Laxman Patil, Vishal Mahadev Shinde, etc., under section 120B, 204, 419, 468 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 16, 18, 18B, 20 of UAPA.

Cause Title:-  Ravikiran Balaso Gaikwad v National Investigation Agency