'Supporter Of ISIS Ideology, Arranged Illegal Weapons': Delhi High Court Denies Bail To Accused In UAPA Case

The Delhi High Court yesterday denied regular bail to a 25 year old Kashmiri man booked under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, observing that he being a supporter of ideology of banned terrorist organization ISIS, arranged illegal weapons and was involved in providing other logistic support to its cadres.

A division bench comprising Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Manoj Jain dismissed the bail plea of Jamsheed Zahoor Paul who was arrested by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in 2018.

The NIA alleged that Paul had allegiance to ISIS and was involved in procuring arms and ammunition for their cadres for executing some terrorist act in Jammu & Kashmir.

Paul was nabbed in the national capital after he was found moving towards Lal Qila. One pistol containing five live cartridges in its magazine was recovered from him. It was the prosecution's case that Paul, and another man arrested with him, disclosed that they had procured the recovered weapons, in lieu of money from four persons from UP.

It was also alleged that during investigation, both of them divulged that they were propagating ideology of terroristISIS in India and were in touch with another ISIS militant, Abdullah Basith.

Dismissing his bail plea, the bench said that the procurement of sophisticated weapons cannot be brushed aside casually. It added that Paul's disclosure has actually led to recovery of some vital facts and, therefore, such part cannot be labelled as inadmissible.

“BBM display picture of account of appellant has image of four terrorists, two of whom are carrying AK47 rifles. Such profile picture of BBM account of appellant reveals his frame of mind and cannot be brushed aside casually, in view of the peculiar factual matrix of the case in hand,” the court said.

The bench observed that Paul and the other accused had procured weapons from UP, had come to Delhi together and were planning to go to Kashmir together. Therefore, the court said that at this initial juncture, it cannot be said that there was no agreement or tacit understanding or meeting of minds between them.

“As per prosecution, these weapons were being arranged for perpetuating terror and, therefore, at this stage, testing the case on broad probabilities, there is material to show that there is a prima facie true case against the appellant,” the court said.

It added: “Thus, at this stage, appellant does not seem to be in any position to wriggle out of the statutory bar contained in proviso of Section 43D (5) of UAPA as there are clear-cut allegations which go on to indicate that accusation against him is prima facie true. This observation is based on broad probabilities and surface analysis of material collected by respondent.”

Counsel for Appellant: Mr. Nizam Pasha, Mr. Ahmad Ibrahim, Ms. Ayesha Zaidi, Mr. Siddharth Kaushik and Ms. Awastika Das, Advocates

Counsel for Respondent: Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP for the State

Title: JAMSHEED ZAHOOR PAUL v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 492

Click here to read order