The Provision of bail in UAPA

Key aspect

About

Objective

To make powers available to the state for dealing with activities directed against the integrity and sovereignty of India.

Unlawful organisation

Any organization could now be termed as ‘unlawful’ by the government subject to judicial review.

Terrorist act

Any act done with the intention to threaten or likely to threaten the unity, integrity, security, economic security, or sovereignty of India or with intent to strike terror or likely to strike terror in the people or any section of the people in India or in any foreign country.

Terrorist gang

It empowered the authorities to investigate and arrest a group of people who are involved in unlawful activities and the central government can term them as ‘terrorist gang’.

Terrorist organization

It means an organization listed in the Schedule or an organization operating under the same name as an organization so listed.

Custody of accused

The accused could be taken into custody without a charge sheet, it could be extended to 180 days.

Grant of bail

Section 43D(5) states that the test for denying bail under the UAPA is that the court must be satisfied that a “prima facie” case exists against the accused.

Economic offence

To fulfil obligation under Financial Action Task Force, the government added offences that threaten the country’s economic security in the definition of ‘terrorist act’.

Individuals as terrorists

 Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 2019  allows the government to tag ‘individuals’ as terrorists as they are the one who carries out the terrorist act and not an organization.

Seizure of property

It empowers the Director-General of National Investigation Agency (NIA) to grant approval of seizure or attachment of property when the case is investigated by the agency.

Court’s ruling on bail under UAPA case

• Delhi High Court granted bail to student activists, it emphasized that the prosecution must present specific factual allegations rather than relying on broad speculations and inferences.
• Anand Teltumbde's Case- Bombay High Court insisted on the prosecution demonstrating a nexus between the accused and the offense.
• Union of India vs KA Najeeb, 2021- It allowed bail considering the significant period of incarceration undergone by the accused.
• The decision acknowledged that bail under UAPA is an exception but should be balanced with the right to a speedy trial.
• Gonsalves case, 2023- It differed from Watali judgement and said that the courts must do a surface-analysis of the evidence and its worth before granting bail.
• Gurwinder Singh case- It relied on the Watali ruling entirely without considering the Gonsalves ruling.