IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 2715 – 2719 OF 2024
(@ SLP (Crl.) Nos. 14036-14040 of 2023)
UNION OF INDIA
rep. by the Inspector of Police
National Investigation Agency
Chennai Branch …APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
BARAKATHULLAH ETC. …RESPONDENT(S)
MAY 22nd, 2024.
Investigation Agency (NIA) against an order of the Madras High Court granting bail to the respondents, who were accused of offenses under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
2. The respondents were members or office bearers of the Popular Front of India (PFI), an organization alleged to have an extremist Islamic agenda.
3. The respondents were arrested on 22.09.2022 and charged with offenses under Sections 120B, 121A, 122, 153A, 505(1)(b), (c), (2) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 13, 18, 18A, 18B, 38, and 39 of the UAPA.
4. The Special Court dismissed the bail applications of the respondents, but the High Court granted them bail, which the NIA challenged in the Supreme Court.
5. The Supreme Court referred to Section 43D(5) of the UAPA, which imposes restrictions on granting bail in UAPA cases.
6. The Court analyzed the principles laid down in National Investigation Agency vs. Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali and Gurwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab regarding the interpretation of Section 43D(5) of the UAPA.
7. The Court emphasized that at the bail stage, the court is only required to record a finding based on broad probabilities regarding the involvement of the accused in the alleged offenses.
8. The Court examined the chargesheet and other materials collected by the NIA during the investigation, including statements of protected witnesses and listed witnesses.
9. The Court found that there was sufficient material to form an opinion that there were reasonable grounds for believing that the accusations against the respondents were prima facie true.
10. The Court criticized the High Court for its perverse finding that there was no material to suggest the commission of any offense under Section 15 of the UAPA.
11. The Court clarified that for the offenses under Section 18 of the UAPA, the actual commission of a terrorist act as defined in Section 15 need not be shown; any act preparatory to the commission of a terrorist act would suffice.
12. The Court held that the High Court had failed to comprehend the correct import of Section 18 read with the definition of a terrorist act in Section 15 of the UAPA.
13. The Court rejected the respondents’ contention that the material and witness statements relied upon by the NIA were not reliable, citing the principle that at the bail stage, such materials cannot be discarded.
14. The Court distinguished the cases relied upon by the respondents, stating that they were not applicable to the present case.
15. The Court considered the seriousness and gravity of the alleged offenses, the previous criminal history of the respondents, and the period of custody undergone by them.
16. The Court emphasized the importance of national security and the need to restrict acts in aid of terrorist activities.
17. The Court set aside the impugned order of the High Court granting bail to the respondents.
18. The Court directed the respondents to surrender before the NIA.
19. The Court directed the Special Court to proceed with the trial expeditiously and without being influenced by the observations made in this order.
20. The appeals filed by the NIA were allowed.
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court (Jabalpur)
Judge: Amar Nath (Kesharwani), J.
Case Number: Misc. Appeal No. 238 of 2019
Decision Date: 28th June 2023
Appellant: National Insurance Company Limited
Respondents: Jamni Bai and Other
Even a married daughter who is not dependent on the deceased is entitled to file a claim petition.
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Sections 166, 168, and 173 – Claim Petition – Death Claim – Appeal by Insurance Company – Compensation – Quantum
In this case, the deceased was a 65-year-old woman earning Rs. 8,000 per month from labor work at the time of the accident. A multiplier of 7 was applied, and the notional income was assessed as Rs. 4,500 per month. One-third of the income was deducted towards personal expenses, resulting in a total dependency amount of Rs. 2,52,000. Additionally, Rs. 15,000 was awarded for loss of estate and Rs. 15,000 for funeral expenses, bringing the total compensation to Rs. 2,82,000. The award was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Jabalpur)
Court: Karnataka High Court (DB) (Dharwad Bench)
Judges: Mr. Ashok S. Kinagi and Rajesh Rai K, JJ.
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 100207 of 2020
Decision Date: 10th January 2024
Appellant: Mallappa @ Malleshappa
Respondent: State of Karnataka
In cases involving forceful sexual coitus, the Court can rely on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix. However, this testimony must circumvent any doubts and inspire confidence in the Court regarding its trustworthiness, be unblemished, and of sterling quality.
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Sections 4, 6, 8, and 12 – Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 376(2)(i), 448, and 450 – Rape – Conviction and Sentence
There was a contradiction regarding the age of the victim girl between the medical evidence and the school certificate. Additionally, P.W.2 admitted there was a delay in lodging the complaint and that media personnel were invited to the police station when the complaint was filed. There was also political rivalry between the families of the accused and the victim. P.W.2’s evidence did not inspire confidence in the Court. Although P.W.6 was an independent witness, he partially turned hostile to the prosecution’s case. As a result, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appeal was allowed.