New Delhi: The Supreme Court has set aside the Delhi High Court's order allowing default bail to an accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, saying the High Court committed an error in allowing the petition and granting default bail to the respondent.
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Rajesh Bindal said: "One more aspect to be considered is the nature of offence which involved terrorist activities having not only Pan India impact but also impact on other enemy States. The matter should not have been taken so lightly".
The accused was arrested on June 18, 2020, after the registration of an FIR by the Delhi Police Special Cell on June 16, 2020, under various provisions of the UAPA. The bench, in a judgment delivered on January 3, ordered forthwith custody of Raj Kumar alias Lovepreet alias Lovely, after finding that the police had already filed the charge sheet prior to extended time granted to them for the purpose.
The bench said the High Court also committed an error in recording a finding that sanction had already been received prior to the date of making the application for extension in November 2020, and the recording of the said fact is not correct.
It noted that during the course of investigation one Gurtej Singh had been arrested, who had links with Pakistan-based terrorists and had been planning to go to Pakistan for weapons training along with his associate respondent No.2 Rajkumar alias Lovely and others.
"The High Court also failed to consider that after completing the investigation, the police report under section 173(2) CrPC had already been submitted prior to November 30, 2020, which was the last date of the extended period”, said the bench.
“The High Court also fell in error in not taking into consideration the reasons given under section 43D(2) (b) were clearly made out and explained in the extension letter dated November 7, 2020, giving the details of the progress of the investigation as also the reasons for detaining the respondent," observed the bench.
It also noted that the public prosecutor had mentioned in the request that a major investigation of the case had been completed and the draft chargesheet had been prepared. However, for want of remaining sanctions and the FSL report some more time was required for completing the investigation, said the bench.
The Delhi government filed an appeal against the High Court order of February 11, 2021, granting default bail to the accused under Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The bench also pointed out that under Section 43 D(2)(b) of the UAPA, the extension for investigation could be granted up to a maximum period of 180 days for specific reasons.
"We are, therefore, of the view that the reason mentioned in the HC order that the application had been filed for extension without any valid basis as the sanction had already been granted, was not correct," said the apex court.
Read more:
