Wednesday, 2 February 2022



This act means an anti - terror legislation in this if a person gets arrested then that cannot be released easily.


In this case it happened that the professor who was setting the question paper for B.COM. exam, in that there was objection in question paper for a particular religion. After that incident Najeeb goes to popular front of Indian which is an extremist organisation, gather them together and attack on 4th July 2010 over the professor and cut his right had above that they threw bomb over nearby public to make them feel scared

When this act gets into investigation it was found that the pre- planned conspiracy and Najeeb, others conspirators were get arrested under Unlawful Activity (prevention)Act. The case goes to the NIA Special Court agency, if any one was found co-accuse guilty then the person was given punishment 2 to 8 years imprisonment. After committing the act in 2010 Najeeb ran away from After committing the act in 2010 Najeeb ran away from police but few years later he was found again in 2015, then he got arrested. After the arrested he was kept under the judicial custody without any Trail in court for 5years. NCRB, national crime records bureau in this if a person is arrested under this act, then only 2.2% are found guilty only.

The provision which was laid in this case UAPA Section 43 D (5), in this provision it provides a especial rights to the state that if they feels about the case it's judgement can Deny or put Restrictions on getting bail to a person. This provision helps a lot to the prosecutors which makes a weapon in the case, by using this they can easily deny the released-on bail or on his own bond. The Article 21 includes a fundamental right which is right to have a speedy Trail (protection), and UAPA which includes section 43D (5) Restriction on bail (Restriction). So, the question was in this case that during the pending trail under trail peoples are going to have a speedy trail protection given under article 21 else will have UAPA ACT section 43 D (5) of Restriction will be prevail?

In the case till when the Najeeb was arrested to date, 2015- 2019 in that Najeeb had applied 6 times for a bail before the court by claiming that the accused under this act is being granted bail by the court but court always claims that Najeeb will not going to be granted bail since he was the main conspirators of the whole play and saying all these the special court rejected the bail application

Then Najeeb approaches to Kerala High Court against the special court and applies for bail application. The court granted the bail to Najeeb on infringement of right to speedy trail, access to Justice. This case overtaken by NIA National Investigation Agency approach to Supreme court were against the judgement to Kerala High Court, said that normal criminal laws does not applies on UPAPA ACT.

And it will not applies on it when NIA have strong any evidences against Najeeb but NIA says that there are 267 witnesses and some of the witnesses trial was still pending so this trail of the case will not be completed sooner, till then Najeeb had to stay in judicial custody. 

The accuse Najeeb says that people who were under accused in this act they got only 8yrs of imprisonment where he was kept in custody for 5nhalf years in jail without trail, he can't keep in jail for an indefinite period in jail and trail for a trail to be happen this was infringement of his right to speedy trail also given a reference of case Shaheen Welfare Association V. UOI.

No comments:

Post a Comment


  The first of these and the oldest is the view that the level of prices is determined by the quantity of money. The ratio of the stock of m...