The Supreme Court has refused to cancel the bail of a man accused of radicalization towards the banned terrorist organization ISIS, who is facing trial under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA). The decision was delivered by a bench of Justices Surya Kant and N. Kotiswar Singh, who considered the duration of the trial and the accused's conduct on bail.

The court noted that the trial was expected to take a "reasonable" amount of time due to the prosecution's plan to examine over 160 witnesses, of which only 44 had been examined so far. The accused had already spent nearly three years in custody before being granted bail by the Delhi High Court.

Read Also:-SCAORA Urges CJI BR Gavai to Reinstate Adjournment Letter Circulation and Advance Hearing

"Prosecution proposes to examine more than 160 witnesses, out of whom 44 have been examined. Conclusion of trial will take some reasonable time. Respondent was released on bail after spending about 3 yrs in custody as undertrial," Justice Surya Kant observed.

The court also emphasized that there had been no reports of bail misuse by the accused, who had consistently appeared before the trial court and had not attempted to interfere with the ongoing trial process.

However, the bench found merit in the submissions of Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati, representing the National Investigation Agency (NIA). The ASG urged the court to impose a restriction on the accused's foreign travel during the trial period, which the court accepted.

Read Also:-Supreme Court Affirms Right to Unobstructed, Disabled-Friendly Footpaths Under Article 21

"The respondent shall not travel abroad unless express prior permission is granted by the High Court," the court directed.

Background of the Case:

The case originated from a Delhi High Court order dated May 6, 2024, which granted bail to the accused. The National Investigation Agency (NIA) arrested the accused in August 2021 under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 2(o), 13, 38, and 39 of the UAPA.

According to the NIA, the accused was allegedly radicalized towards ISIS and conspired with known and unknown ISIS members for "Hijrah" (migration) to Jammu and Kashmir and other ISIS-controlled areas to join the terrorist organization. The investigation also revealed that his mobile phone contained videos related to ISIS, brutal killings, and photographs of terrorist Osama Bin Laden, Jihad promotion, and ISIS flags, indicating his radical mindset.

Read Also:-Madhya Pradesh High Court Orders FIR Against Minister Vijay Shah for Remarks Against Col. Sofiya Qureshi

However, the Delhi High Court, while granting bail, stated that simply possessing incriminating material like ISIS videos and photographs on a mobile phone did not automatically establish the accused as an ISIS member.

"Merely because the mobile device of the appellant was found carrying incriminating material including photographs of terrorist Osama Bin Laden, Jihad Promotion, ISIS flags etc., and he was also accessing lectures of hard-liner/Muslim preachers would not be enough to brand him as a member of such terrorist organization," the High Court had observed.

The Supreme Court, while maintaining the bail order, clarified that the High Court's observations on the merits of the allegations were strictly for bail purposes and would not impact the final outcome of the trial.

Case Title: NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY Versus AMMAR ABDUL RAHIMAN, SLP(Crl) No. 12883/2024