Delhi High Court Rejects Inderpal Gaba's Challenge To NIA Arrest & Remand Over Protest At Indian High Commission In London

Gaba was charged under Section 13 of UAPA (punishment for unlawful activities), Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act (mischief causing damage to public property), Section 2 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honours Act (insults to Indian National Flag and Constitution of India) along with IPC provisions.

The incident relates to the protests at the High Commission of India, London, United Kingdom which took place on 19 March and 22 March, 2023.

As per the prosecution's case, on 19 March 2023, a crowd of around 60 protestors gathered in front of the High Commission building and carried flags used by Khalistani separatists. The protestors allegedly shouted anti-India and Khalistani slogans and dishonourably pulled down the Indian flag. The High Commission's property was also vandalized. Further, the prosecution's case i that the audio-video evidence shows the presence and active involvement of Gaba on 22 March 2023 protest.

A lookout circular was issued against Gaba. On 09 December 2023, he was detained by the Immigration Authorities while entering India from Pakistan at Attari border. Gaba's passport was seized by the NIA and he was subsequently arrested on 24 April 2024.

NIA submitted a remand application and Gaba was remanded into custody on 25 April and it was extended on 03 May. Gaba challenged the remand orders and sought to declare his arrest by the NIA as illegal.

Gaba's main contention was that he did not get a copy of grounds of arrest, which violated Article 22 of the Indian Constitution. He also argued that a copy of the FIR was not provided to his advocate and that was fatal to the case.

Referring to the remand application, a single judge Justice Subramonium Prasad noted that the application gave the facts, details of the protest and how Gaba was questioned for his involvement in the protest. It further noted that the application also gave the necessity of detaining him in custody.

The Court opined that the remand application contained both reasons and grounds to arrest Gaba, thus satisfying the conditions of Section 43B of UAPA, which mandates that any officer arresting a person under UAPA shall inform him of the grounds for arrest.

The Court observed that he was not deprived of the information of the grounds of arrest as it was forwarded to his advocate.

On the copy of FIR not being provided, the Court stated CrPC and UAPA only mandate that a copy of the FIR should be supplied by the Investigating Officer to the complainant.

It referred to the case of Youth Bar Association of India vs. UOI (2016), where the Supreme Court observed that the copies of the FIRs should be uploaded on the police website within 24 hours of its registration unless the offence concerned is sensitive in nature like offences pertaining to insurgency, terrorism and sexual offences.

The Court stated that as both reasons and grounds of arrest were provided to Gaba, Article 22(1) of the Constitution was not violated in the case.

The Court thus dismissed the petition.

Case title: Inder Pal Singh Gaba vs. National Investigation Agency

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1238