Terrorism and the law: India
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. |
Contents |
Court judgment
Downloading bin Laden’s photo doesn’t make one a terrorist: HC
May 7, 2024: The Times of India
New Delhi: Fascination with a terrorist organisation doesn’t mean the person was associated with it, Delhi High Court said, granting bail to an alleged IS supporter booked under the anti-terror UAPA law.
“Merely because the mobile device of the appellant was found carrying incriminating material including photographs of terrorist Osama bin Laden, Jihad promotion, IS 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 organisation, much less his being acting in furtherance of its cause,” a bench of justices Suresh Kait and Manoj Jain noted.
It said accused Ammar Abdul Rahiman was, at best, a “'highly radicalised person” who believed in IS ideology and was storing allegedly objectionable contents on his mobile phone, but there was nothing to indicate that he tried to further disseminate these. Any curious mind, the court observed, could access and download such content from the internet, which, by itself, was not a crime. “Such type of incriminating material, in today’s electronic era, was freely available on World Wide Web (www) and mere accessing the same and even downloading the same would not be sufficient to hold that he had associated himself with IS,” it said, allowing Rahiman’s plea for bail.
“At best, the appellant was highly radicalised and had downloaded pro-IS material and was accessing the sermons of Muslim hard-liners but that would not be enough to attract Section 38 (offence relating to membership of a terrorist organisation) and 39 (Offence relating to support given to a terrorist organisation) of UAPA,” the court stated.
National Investigation Agency (NIA) alleged that Rahiman, arrested in August 2021, entered into criminal conspiracy with IS members for undertaking ‘Hijrah’ to Jammu and Kashmir and to carry out the activities of IS in India.
Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime (GUJCTOC) Act
2019
Kapil Dave, Nov 6, 2019: The Times of India
Sixteen years after the Gujarat assembly passed the controversial anti-terror legislation which was popularly known as GUJCOCA or the Gujarat Control of Organized Crime Act, the law was finally ratified by President Ramnath Kovind.
Known as Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime (GUJCTOC) Act in its news avatar, the law gives extensive powers to the state police to counter terror and organised crime. A confession made before a police official of the rank of SP and above will now be admissible in court as evidence. So far, only confessions made before a magistrate were admissible as evidence.
GUJCOCA was returned thrice earlier by various Presidents and was last amended in 2015. Gujarat junior home minister Pradipsinh Jadeja said GUJCTOC Act will help break the back of terrorism. “The Act was envisioned by the then Gujarat CM and current PM Narendra Modi to fight terrorism and organised crime like Ponzi schemes,” said Jadeja, adding that the state government has enforced the strong law against disruptive elements in the state which has a 1,600-kmlong coastline. Elaborating on the Act’s salient features, Jadeja said: “A positive provision of this law is that electronic intercepts, including oral communication, will be admissible as evidence in courts.”
Significantly, GUJCTOC Act provides immunity to the state government and its officers from legal action in the form of a suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings for an action that is “done or intended to be done in good faith in pursuance of the Act”.
Under the new law, cops get up to 180 days instead of the stipulated 90 days to file a chargesheet. The accused will not be granted bail until the public prosecutor has got a chance to oppose the bail application. Also, authorities are empowered to confiscate unaccounted properties of the accused. Besides, a witness will get special protection under this Act, Jadeja said.
Congress, which opposed GUJCOCA from its inception calling in ‘Draconian’, said the law will to be a “major threat” to the privacy of citizens.
