SC Judgment Review 2021: Terror
Supreme Court Observer / by Gauri Kashyap
We discuss two judgments where the Court engaged with bail under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA).
In 2021, the Supreme Court issued 865 judgments. In a series of posts, we conduct a thematic review of the most important judgments of the year. Here, we discuss two judgments where the Court engaged with bail under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA).
Bail Under UAPA: Court in Review
Supreme Court Observer / by Ayushi Saraogi
Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 lays down stringent provisions for the grant of bail.
In the aftermath of the Bombay terror attacks, the Union government enacted the UAPA Amendment Act, 2008. The Amendment introduced Section 43D (5), which required a Court to deny bail if there were reasonable grounds to believe that the case against the accused was prima facie true. The provision made bail difficult to secure, since it required the Court to assess guilt only by looking at the charge sheet prepared by the National Investigation Agency (NIA). The accused cannot provide any evidence outside the chargesheet in their defense.
● 4,690 UAPA arrests between 2018-21; only 3.1% convictions (The Federal / Dec 2021)
● UAPA: Lawyers Challenge Sections Defining ‘Unlawful Activities’ as Vague (Gauri Lankesh News / Nov 2021)
● Bhima Koregaon Case: Trying Without a Trial Is the Intent of Draconian UAPA Law (The Wire / July 2021)