A special NIA court in Panchkula has dismissed the bail plea of Parminder Singh alias Pinder, an accused in a terror conspiracy case involving the alleged smuggling of explosives, arms and ammunition from Pakistan into India through drones.
Special judge Vijayant Sehgal rejected the 43-year-old Ferozepur resident’s plea on Saturday, observing that the material collected by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) prima facie disclosed his involvement in the alleged activities of a terrorist gang. The court held that the statutory restrictions on bail under Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) were attracted.
According to the prosecution, Parminder was among four occupants of a white Toyota Innova intercepted by the police at Bastara toll plaza in Madhuban, Karnal, on May 5, 2022. During the search, three improvised explosive devices (IEDs), two magazines, 31 live rounds, six mobile phones and ₹1.30 lakh cash were allegedly recovered.
Subsequently, an FIR under Sections 4 & 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, Sections 13, 18 & 20 of the UAPA, and Section 25 of the Arms Act was registered at Madhuban police station in Haryana.
The NIA alleged that Pakistan-based designated terrorist Harwinder Singh Sandhu alias Rinda, associated with the banned Babbar Khalsa International, had sent arms, explosives and narcotics into India through drones. Parminder was allegedly recruited in March 2022 and subsequently motivated another accused to join the network. He was also allegedly involved in identifying locations near the border for delivery of consignments.
{{/usCountry}}The NIA alleged that Pakistan-based designated terrorist Harwinder Singh Sandhu alias Rinda, associated with the banned Babbar Khalsa International, had sent arms, explosives and narcotics into India through drones. Parminder was allegedly recruited in March 2022 and subsequently motivated another accused to join the network. He was also allegedly involved in identifying locations near the border for delivery of consignments.
{{/usCountry}}Opposing bail, the NIA submitted that seven other cases, including one under the UAPA, were registered against him. It also told the court that 72 of the 164 prosecution witnesses had been examined, while protected witnesses were yet to depose.
The court rejected his plea for parity with a co-accused who had been granted bail, citing the distinct role attributed to him. It held that no exceptional circumstance justified his release despite the period of custody undergone.
The court clarified that its observations were confined to the bail application and would not affect the merits of the trial.