UAPA | Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Receiving Arms, Explosives From Across The Border

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has granted bail to a man accused of receiving arms, ammunition and explosive substances from across the border for using it to indulge in "anti-national activities." The accused was booked under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA Act) in 2022.

A division bench of Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal and Justice Kirti Singh said that, "The provisions of the UAPA Act are stringent and therefore, at the same time, it is necessary for the Court to carefully scrutinize the material in reference to the accusation against the accused."

While granting the bail, the Court noted that the present case, besides the statement of the co-accused that the appellant was also traveling ahead of them on his vehicle, "there does not seem to be any other material at this stage which would connect the appellant with the commission of the offence."

These observations came in response to the appeal challenging the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Moga dismissing the bail application under Section 439 CrPC. 

The accused, Nirmal Singh was booked under Sections 25(6), 25(7) of the Arms Act and Sections 10, 13, 18 and 20 of the UAPA Act and Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Explosive Substances Act.

It was alleged that Singh, along with the other co-accused, was receiving arms, ammunition, and explosive substances from across the border and had been using them to indulge in anti-national activities, including spreading terror, etc.

The appellant had been arraigned as an accused on the statement of co-accused, that he was traveling on a scooter ahead of the other co-accused to alert them about any barricading by the police.

Considering the submissions, the Court noted that the counsel for the appellant has submitted that as per the affidavit filed by the DSP, "there does not seem to be any recovery effected from the appellant."

"It is thus manifest that besides the statement of the co- accused wherein he has stated that the appellant was also traveling ahead of them, there does not seem to be any material to connect the appellant with the commission of the offence," said the Court.

The bench noted further that there is no recovery from the appellant and nothing to indicate that as per call locations or call details, the appellant was in touch with the co-accused in close proximity to the commission of the offence or their arrest as they are stated to have been apprehended along with arms and ammunition.

Adding that under the provisions of the UAPA Act, bail can be granted if the Court is of the opinion that there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the accusations against the accused are prima facie true, the Court except the statement of co-accused, "there does not seem to be any other material at this stage which would connect the appellant with the commission of the offence."

The Court also considered that Singh was not involved in any other criminal case and has been in custody for a period of more than 1 year and 1 month.

Furthermore, the Court opined that, "We, therefore, have no hesitation to hold that there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against the appellant is prima facie true."

Consequently, the bench granted the relief.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (PH) 252

Appearance: Balbir Kumar Saini, Advocate and Vikas Malik, Advocate for the appellant.

 Harmandeep Singh Sullar, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

Click here to read/download the order.