Courts must scrutinize evidence before upholding UAPA detentions: HC

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that the courts are duty bound to scrutinize the material against the accused and ensure that detention in cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act is supported by evidence.

The assertion came as a Division Bench granted regular bail to an accused in custody for more than two years and five months without adequate material to justify his further incarceration. The direction came as the Bench acknowledged the high bars set by UAPA in such matters.

The Bench of Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal and Justice Lapita Banerji asserted the allegation against the appellant-accused was that he was harboring a co-accused, who had been granted bail.

The court added the appellant was not present at the crime spot. Apparently there was no other material to connect him with the commission of an offence. Besides this, incriminating material either in the form of arms, explosives or dubious bank transaction had not surfaced at the current stage indicating financial motive.

“We are conscious of the fact that the conditions for granting bail to an accused under UAPA are stringent. However, at the same time, it is the duty of the Court to carefully scrutinize the material against the appellant. We do not find adequate material against the appellant which would justify his further incarceration,” the Bench asserted.

The court added Article 21 of the Constitution enshrined fundamental right to protection of life and liberty, which included sacrosanct right to speedy trial. The Supreme Court in a catena of judgments had also held that long custody by itself would entitle the accused under UAPA to bail by invoking Article 21.

“In the instant case, 12 out of 50 prosecution witnesses have been examined. In such a situation, it would be difficult to hazard a guess about the conclusion of the trial…. The Constitutional Court would like to prevent a situation where the lengthy and arduous process of trial, becomes a punishment in itself,” the Bench added.

Before parting with the case, the Bench allowed the appeal and set aside impugned order, whereby Nawanshahr Additional Sessions Judge dismissed his bail plea in an FIR registered on November 8, 2021, for attempt to murder and other offences under Sections 307, 427, 212, 120-B of the IPC; the provisions of the UAPA and the Arms Act at Nawanshahr City police station.