Sign in

Citing procedural lapses high court grants bail to 11 accused booked under UAPA

The accused were arrested in separate cases registered against them at the ATS police station in Gomti Nagar, Lucknow. The court quashed the orders of the special court rejecting the default bail applications.

Updated on: May 20, 2024, 05:10:00 IST
Share
Share via
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • linkedin
  • whatsapp
Copy link
  • copy link

LUCKNOW: The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court has granted default bail to 11 alleged operatives of AQIS (Al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent) and JMB (Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh) in a case registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), citing procedural lapses by the prosecution and the special court.

Lucknow High Court building (Sourced)
Lucknow High Court building (Sourced)

This order, passed by a division bench comprising Justices Attau Rahman Masoodi and Manish Kumar Nigam on May 14, highlights the importance of adhering to statutory requirements and safeguarding the rights of the accused.

The case pertains to multiple criminal appeals filed by Mohammed Aleem aka Abdul Aleem, Mohammad Nawajis Ansari, Lukman, Mudassir, Mohammad Mukhtar, Mohammad Nadeem, Habeebul Islam, Mohammad Harish, Ash Mohammad, Qari Shahjad, and Ali Noor, challenging the orders of the special court rejecting their applications for default bail.

The accused were arrested in separate cases registered against them at the ATS police station in Gomti Nagar, Lucknow. The court quashed the orders of the special court rejecting the default bail applications. It further granted default bail to the accused on certain conditions, including furnishing bail bonds, surrendering passports, and cooperating with the investigation and trial proceedings.

Allowing the applications for bail, the court observed, “The failure to procure the presence of the accused either physically or virtually before the court and the failure to inform him that the application made by the public prosecutor for the extension of time is being considered, is not a mere procedural irregularity. It is a gross illegality that violates the rights of the accused under Article 21.”