Union Of India vs Saleem Khan on 25 November, 2022

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Union Of India vs Saleem Khan on 25 November, 2022

Bench: Hima Kohli

                                                          1



      ITEM NO.30                                COURT NO.1                      SECTION II-C

                                   S U P R E M E C O U R T O F             I N D I A
                                           RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

                         SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) Diary No(s). 30597/2022

      (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 21-04-2022
      in CRLA No. 130/2021 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at
      Bengaluru)

      UNION OF INDIA                                                             Petitioner(s)

                                                         VERSUS

      SALEEM KHAN                                                                Respondent(s)

      (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.160399/2022-CONDONATION OF DELAY
      IN FILING )

      Date : 25-11-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today.

      CORAM :               HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                            HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

      For Petitioner(s)                  Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, ASG
                                         Ms. Sairica Raju, Adv.
                                         Mr. B.K. Satija, Adv.
                                         Mr. Gautam Bharadwaj, Adv.
                                         Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR

      For Respondent(s)


                             UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                                O R D E R

      1               Delay condoned.


      2               Ms Aishwarya Bhati, Additional Solicitor General submits that while granting bail

to the respondent (Saleem Khan, A-11), the High Court has, in paragraph 22 of Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by the impugned judgment misinterpreted the provisions of Sections 15, 18, 18A, GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA Date: 2022.11.29 10:15:44 IST Reason: 2 18B and 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967. 3 The High Court has observed that in the absence of any allegation in regard to the commission of an offence under Section 15, the offence punishable under Section 18 would not arise.

4 In this context, it has been submitted that Section 18 deals with punishment for conspiracy or attempting to commit or advocating, abetting, advising, inciting or facilitating the commission of a terrorist act or any act preparatory to the commission of a terrorist act.

5 The submission is that even though there is no specific allegation with reference to the provisions of Section 15 which deals with a terrorist act, Section 18 (punishment for conspiracy, etc.), Section 18A (punishment for organising of terrorist camps), Section 18B (Punishment for recruiting of any person or persons for terrorist act) and Section 20 (punishment for being member of terrorist gang or organisation) would independently apply.

6 Moreover, it has been submitted that the High Court has declined to grant bail to A-20. The allegation in the chargesheet is that the respondent (A-11) had recruited A-20.

7 On the above premises, it has been submitted that though Al-Hind Organisation is not a banned terrorist organisation, independent of that, the provisions of the statute would be attracted and there is an error on the part of the High Court in interpreting the provisions.

8 Issue notice returnable on 6 January 2023.

9 Dasti service, in addition, is permitted.

(GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA)                           (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR)
     AR-CUM-PS                                  ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Supreme Court - Daily Orders