news details |
|
|
| NIA Court rejects bail of accused in Hizbul terror case | | |  Early Times Report
Jammu, Aug 6: The Special NIA Court, Jammu, has rejected the bail application of Irfan Shafi Mir, an accused in the alleged Hizbul Mujahideen terror conspiracy case involving dismissed police officer Devinder Singh and militant commander Syed Naveed Mushtaq.
Special Judge NIA Cases Prem Sagar dismissed the application after holding that prolonged incarceration could not, by itself, become a ground for bail when the material on record indicated the accused’s prima facie involvement in serious offences affecting national security.
Mir is facing trial in NIA case RC No. 01/2020/NIA/JMU for offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, IPC, Arms Act and Explosive Substances Act. Advocate Haroon Khursheed appeared for the accused, while Special Public Prosecutor K.S. Pathania, assisted by Public Prosecutors Chandan Kumar Singh and Ashwani Verma, represented the NIA.
Seeking bail, the accused submitted that he had remained in judicial custody for more than six years and that the trial was proceeding at a slow pace. His counsel argued that continued detention without early completion of trial violated his fundamental right to speedy justice under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The defence further claimed that the prosecution witnesses examined so far had not disclosed sufficient incriminating material against Mir and that there was no likelihood of him absconding, influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence.
Opposing the plea, the NIA alleged that Mir had conspired with Devinder Singh and Syed Naveed Mushtaq to wage war against the Government of India and extend support to the banned Hizbul Mujahideen.
According to the investigating agency, Mir allegedly used his position as an advocate to facilitate the movement of two Hizbul militants from Srinagar to Jammu in February 2019. The alleged plan was to help Syed Naveed Mushtaq cross over to Pakistan with the assistance of Pakistan-based Hizbul leadership and the ISI.
The NIA also accused Mir of raising and transferring funds, harbouring active militants and participating in recruitment activities for the banned terrorist organisation.
The agency submitted that charges had already been framed against the accused under various provisions of the UAPA, IPC, Arms Act and Explosive Substances Act. It maintained that the accusations were prima facie true and attracted the statutory bar against bail under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA.
The court observed that the ordinary principle of “bail is the rule and jail is the exception” does not apply with the same force in UAPA cases. Where reasonable grounds exist to believe that the accusations are prima facie true, bail is required to be refused.
The judge noted that the trial was underway and witnesses were being examined regularly. The material on record indicated Mir’s alleged involvement in a conspiracy connected with members of a banned terrorist organisation.
The court further observed that releasing the accused could result in key witnesses being influenced and could hamper the course of justice. Holding that long custody and individual liberty were not sufficient grounds for release in the circumstances, the Special Judge rejected the bail application. (JNF) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
