Supreme Court cancels bail granted to PFI members in UAPA case and says, “National security is always of paramount importance”

While hearing the Union of India rep. by the Inspector of Police National Investigation Agency Chennai Branch vs. Barakathullah etc. case on May 22, 2024, the Supreme (SC) of India canceled the bail granted to 8 men booked under UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act), allegedly belonging to the banned Popular Front of India (PFI). The bench consisting of Justice Bela M Trivedi and Justice Pankaj Mithal canceled the bail stating that the accusations against them, collection of funds to commit terrorist acts, appeared to be ‘prima facie true’. The SC bench said “the accusations against the respondents are prima facie true and that the mandate contained in the proviso to Section 43(D)(5) would be applicable for not releasing the respondents on bail. Having regard to the seriousness and gravity of the alleged offences, previous criminal history of the respondents as mentioned in the charge-sheet, the period of custody undergone by the respondents being hardly one and half years, the severity of punishment prescribed for the alleged offences and prima facie material collected during the course of investigation, the impugned order passed by the High Court cannot be sustained. We are conscious of the legal position that we should be slow in interfering with the order when the bail has been granted by the High Court, however it is equally well settled that if such order of granting bail is found to be illegal and perverse, it must be set aside.”

The bench was hearing an appeal filed by the NIA (National Investigation Agency) against the decision of the High Court granting bail to the accused in the UAPA case on the grounds that there was no direct evidence to link the persons to the ‘vision document’. During the proceedings, the SC noted that it has “often interpreted the counter-terrorism enactments to strike a balance between the civil liberties of the accused, human rights of the victims and compelling interest of the state.” The bench further added, “It cannot be denied that National security is always of paramount importance and any act in aid to any terrorist act – violent or non-violent is liable to be restricted. The UAPA is one of such Acts which has been enacted to provide for effective prevention of certain unlawful activities of individuals and associations, and to deal with terrorist activities, as also to impose reasonable restrictions on the civil liberties of the persons in the interest of sovereignty and integrity of India.” Therefore, the top court, set aside the impugned order passed by the High Court. It added, “The respondents shall forthwith surrender themselves before the appellant-NIA. Since, the chargesheet has already been submitted before the Special Court, it is directed that the Special Court shall proceed with the trial as expeditiously as possible and in accordance with law, without being influenced by any of the observations made by this Court in this order.”