Supreme Court Asks NIA About Time Needed To Commence Trial In UAPA Case Over 2020 Bengaluru Riots

twitter-greylinkedin
Update: 2025-01-31 08:03 GMT
Supreme Court Asks NIA About Time Needed To Commence Trial In UAPA Case Over 2020 Bengaluru Riots
  • whatsapp icon
Click the Play button to listen to article
story

The Supreme Court today (January 31) asked the National Investigation Agency(NIA) how much time it will take for the trial court to frame charges and commence trial against accused in the 2020 Bengaluru riots case.The Court was considering a bail petition field by Shabbar Khan who has been charge-sheeted in a UAPA case related to the riots which happened in Bengaluru on August 11,...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Supreme Court today (January 31) asked the National Investigation Agency(NIA) how much time it will take for the trial court to frame charges and commence trial against accused in the 2020 Bengaluru riots case.

The Court was considering a bail petition field by Shabbar Khan who has been charge-sheeted in a UAPA case related to the riots which happened in Bengaluru on August 11, 2020, reportedly over a Facebook post where it was alleged that derogatory comments were made on Prophet Muhammad.

As per the NIA, the members of the Social Democratic Party of India(SDPI),  the political wing of the proscribed Popular Front of India, were involved. Reportedly, the members conspired to mobilise a larger crowd which gathered at D.J. Halli and KG Halli police stations on the night of August 11 to attack police personnel and cause vandalism to the public and police station vehicles. 

Before a bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma, the Counsel for the petitioner questioned the long period of incarceration of 4 years and 1 month.

At the outset, he stated that the allegation against the petitioner is that he is responsible along with a mob for burning motorcycles. 

As per him, FIR was registered against 198 out of which 138 people have been chargesheet. Out of 138, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 charges have been imposed against 25.

The Counsel submitted that he was not named in the FIR and there is only one NIA Court to conduct a trial for the entire State. In this case, 254 witnesses are to be examined by a Court which is also overburdened, he argued. 

Further, reliance was put on Justice J.B. Pardiwala's judgment in Sheikh Javed Iqbal @ Ashfaq Ansari @ Javed Ansari v. State of Uttar Pradesh(2024) to argue that bail can be granted if there has been a long period of incarceration and unlikelihood of trial. 

Lastly, he stated that the main reason why UAPA has been imposed on the petitioner is because he is a member of SDPI which is a political party and has not even been banned. 

As against this, ASG stated that the trial's commencement was delayed because the petitioner has applied to examine the sanctioning authority first.

Justice Nagarathna asked if any of the accused in the UAPA case has been granted bail. The petitioner's Counsel responded that bail has not been granted to the 25 persons against whom UAPA charges have been applied.

He added: "There is nothing against me. Please see the counter. Let my learned friend point out from the counter if there is anything against me. Mylord, it is about the liberty of a citizen. Even one day [deprivation of liberty is a day too many]...Your lordship generally gives credit to the FIR. My name is not there. Please see the problem of the family. You are creating more people of this nature, terrorists, by this Act [UAPA] by indiscriminately putting behind innocent people. That must be understood by the authority...Mylords can prima facie examine if the provisions of UAPA can apply. If your lordships are satisfied that prima facie if it can be applied, I am out. If it cannot be applied[I should not be incarcerated]. Tomorrow, it can be applied against anybody."

Justice Nagarathna told the ASG : "See the ground reality. There is only one Court. 138 persons are chargesheeted. He is the person chargesheeted in the scheduled offence. What will be the time lag in the commencement of the trial at least? When will the trial commence? Charges have to be framed. Please get all this information ASG. Let us be realistic.."

The bench dictated the order as follows : List it on 13/2 so as to enable learned ASG to ascertain the ground reality with regard to the prosecution of these cases, the cases as against the petitioner.

"See if there is large number of people, it is bound to be a long drawn of trial and everybody gets rounded up in that," Justice Nagarathnasaid.

The matter is now listed on February 13. 

Case Details: SHABBAR KHAN Vs NATIONAL INVESTIGATIVE AGENCY|SLP(Crl) No. 17214/2024

Click Here To Read/Download Order 

Full View


Tags:    

Similar News