'Country Made Pistol Hardly Satisfies Description Of Prohibited Arms': Bombay HC Grants Bail To Rtd. Delhi ACP In Pro-Khalistan Terror Case

A division bench of Justices SS Shinde and NJ Jamadar allowed Parashar's appeal under section 21(4) of the NIA Act, challenging the rejection of his bail application by a Special Court on July 1. He was arrested on 24 April 2019.

"Indisputably, the appellant had been a member of Delhi Police Force. It cannot be said that the appellant has no roots in society. In the context of the charge against the appellant, it does not appear that the release of the appellant would either hamper the further investigation or put hindrance in the trial," the court observed while granting bail.

Parashar claimed that he was not part of a criminal conspiracy but working on a secret mission for the Indian Government with his informant to gather information about the Lashkar-e-Toiba, a terror outfit.

For bail, his counsel Mubin Solkar argued that the NIA didn't charge-sheet him under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) despite provisions of UAPA being invoked in the matter.

Therefore, rigours of 43-D(5) of UAPA would not apply, and his plea would have to be considered as an ordinary bail application under provisions of the CrPC. His arguments found favour with the court.

It is NIA's case that between January to December 2018, Parashar's two co-accused and wanted accused Gurjeet Singh Nijjar conspired to form a separate 'Khalistan State' and were making attempts to revive Sikh militancy. The agency further alleged the three would post videos and images containing praises of Punjabi militants, images and videos of 'Operation Blue Star' and pro-Khalistani posts relating to Babbar Khalsa International (BKI) to motivate like-minded Sikh youths to join the Khalistan Movement in India with the objective of a separate 'Khalistan State.'

And in pursuance of their conspiracy, they arranged for one country-made pistol and five cartridges. The NIA alleged that in the last week of October 2018, Parashar handed over the weapon to co-accused Moin Khan who in turn sold/delivered it to another accused Harpal Singh. The Pune Anti Terrorism Squad registered an offence once the pistol was recovered from Singh's custody.

Solkar said that his client was only booked u/s 120-B(conspiracy) of IPC and sections 3,7 and 25 of Arms Act.

Secret Mission

Solkar argued that in August 2016, Parashar and his trusted police Informant Moin Khan (co-accused) were working on a secret mission. After Parashar's retirement, Khan came to him with information about ISIS and LeT, and they decided to work on the information.

He claimed that the secret information Khan extracted from trips to Nepal and Punjab were shared with RAW and the Delhi Special Cell. As a result, they learned that some members of LeT and ISIS were in contact with alleged Sikh terrorists such as Harpal Singh.

It was then that Khan befriended Harpal Singh and started gathering information about their unlawful activities. Khan also met Delhi Police Commissioner and they eventually shared information with RAW, Parashar claimed.

However, according to Parashar, in October 2018, a dispute arose between Khan and an ACP of the Delhi Special Cell regarding Rs. 50 Crores received through hawala during the secret mission and misappropriated. Khan complained to the IG, Intelligence Bureau.

Khan also filed a writ petition apprehending his implication by the Delhi Special Cell. Parashar claimed that the officers then contacted the Pune and Punjab ATS and Khan was booked.

Country Made Pistol Hardly Prohibited Arm

The court also accepted Solkar's argument on the inapplicability of section 7 of the Arms Act against Parashar, which deals with the prohibition against acquisition or possession of prohibited arms.

The court said that punishment under section 25(1A) for contravention of section 7, is for using automatic, sophisticated arms with mass destruction potential. "A country-made pistol hardly satisfies the description of prohibited arms," the court said, adding, that Parashar could be prosecuted under section 3 of the Arms Act, which prescribes punishment of three years.

Bail Conditions

Parashar is ordered to be released on furnishing a PR bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000 and one or two sureties in the like amount. He shall report to the NIA's Mumbai branch on the first Tuesday of every month between 10:00 am to 12:00 noon, for six months.

Other bail conditions include being present for court hearings and surrendering his passport.

Case Title: Sunderlal Tuhiram Parashar v. NIA & Ors.