E-Paper
Spreading radical ideology on social media can be charged under UAPA: Delhi HC
The Delhi high court said that disseminating radical information and ideology on social media falls within the ambit of UAPA and it is not necessary that the same is to be a physical activity
The Delhi high court has held that engaging in social media or digital activities for disseminating radical information and ideology constitutes a punishable offence under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA).
A bench of justices Subramanian Prasad and Harish Vaidynathan Shankar made this observation in a July 7 ruling, released later, while dealing with a plea filed by Lashkar -e- Taiba (LeT) and The Resistance Front (TRF) overground worker Arsalan Feroze Ahenger against trial court’s September 2024 order refusing to release him on bail.
Ahenger was booked by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) under various provisions of UAPA, including Section 17 (punishment for raising funds for terrorist act), Section 18 (punishment for conspiracy for commission, abetment, incitement of terrorist act), Section 18B (punishment for recruiting any person or persons for terrorist act), Section 38 (membership of a terrorist organisation), and Section 39 (supporting terrorist organisation), alleging that he was associated with LeT terrorist Mehran Yaseen Shalla and actively shared radical content on social media platforms.
The agency further alleged that he created multiple social media groups to propagate extremist ideologies, with the aim of motivating and radicalising vulnerable youth to join terrorist groups such as LeT, TRF. He was arrested by NIA in 2021.
In his petition, Ahenger had asserted that mere factum of sharing images of slain Mehran Yaseen Shalla on social media did not constitute a terrorist act under UAPA and he could thus not be charged under Section 18 and that NIA lacked sufficient evidence to prove his involvement in assisting Shalla.
NIA opposed the bail contending that it had material to prove Ahenger’s active involvement in propagating radical information on social media, for compromising the nation’s safety and security.
However, the bench rejected Ahenger’s contention, saying, “Section 18 of the UAPA prescribes that any person who directly or knowingly incites commission of a terrorist act or any act preparatory to the commission of a terrorist act is liable to be punished under this section. The said provision is framed in such a broader way that even the usage of social media or any digital activity for the purpose of disseminating radical information and ideology falls within its ambit and it is not necessary that the same is to be a physical activity.”
In its 23-page ruling released on Friday, the bench while refusing to release Ahenger on bail, observed that NIA had sufficient evidence to prima facie indicate that he shared messages to incite people for joining terrorist activities, used Shalla’s images, videos to glorify terrorist activities and propagated TRF’s radical ideology for creating unrest within the country.
“There is sufficient material against the Appellant that he has posted photographs of terrorists and has incited people to commit terrorist act. It cannot be said that there is no evidence against the Appellant that he was closely associated with slain terrorist Mehran Yaseen Shalla or that he has actively participated in the terrorist activities himself,” the court maintained. It added, “Material does indicate that the Appellant was disseminating information for inciting local youths to indulge in activities which will lead to commit a terrorist act which is sufficient to bring the Appellant in the ambit of Section 18 of UAPA, thereby satisfying the test of rejection of bail under UAPA.”
The court also shot down Ahenger’s contention that the case under UAPA was not made out against him, since TRF on the date of his arrest and registration of FIR, was not designated as a terrorist organisation under UAPA, saying that the same held no significance “at this stage”.
