Kamran Ashraf Reshi vs National Investigation Agency
- Court
- Delhi High Court
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Reserved on: 25.08.2026
Pronounced on: 03.09.2026
# CNR No. DLHC010223332023
+ CRL.A. 453/2023
KAMRAN ASHRAF RESHI .....Appellant
Through: Mr.Kartik Murukutla and
Mr.Abu Bakr Sabbaq, Advs.
# CNR No. DLHC010236102026
+ CRL.A. 528/2026
SOBIYA AZIZ .....Appellant
Through: Mr.Kartik Venu, Mr.Arjan Ajai
Singh Chonker, Mr.R. Jude
Rohit, Mr.Agrim Tandon and
Ms.Alisha Sharda, Advs.
versus
NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY .....Respondent
Through: Mr.Amit Tiwari, SPP with
Ms.Ayushi Srivastava,
Mr.Kushagra Malik, Mr.Arpan
Narwal and Mr.Ujjwal Tyagi,
Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA
J U D G M E N T
NAVIN CHAWLA, J.
1. These appeals have been filed by the appellants- Sobiya Aziz
(Crl.A. 528/2026) and Kamran Ashraf Reshi (Crl.A. 453/2023) under
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 1 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008
(hereinafter referred to as, „NIA Act‟) challenging the order(s) dated
14.05.2026 (for Sobiya Aziz) and dated 17.03.2023 (for Kamran
Ashraf Reshi) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-03,
New Delhi District, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter
referred to as, the „Trial Court‟) in SC No.2/2022, titled “ NIA v.
Tariq Ahmed Dar & Ors.” (emanating from RC
No.29/2021/NIA/DLI dated 10.10.2021 registered at Police Station
NIA, New Delhi), whereby the learned Trial Court dismissed the bail
applications filed by the appellants herein.
2. These appeals are being taken up for disposal together as many
of the submissions of the learned counsels for the parties were
common.
CRL.A. 528/2026
3. The appellant Sobiya Aziz has been arrayed as accused no.17 in
the chargesheet dated 08.04.2022 filed by the respondent in the above
case.
4. It is the case of the prosecution that reliable information was
received that the cadres of proscribed terrorist organizations such as
Lashkar-e-Taiba („LeT‟), Jaish-e-Mohammed („JeM‟), Hizb-ul-
Mujahideen („HM‟), Al Badr and other similar outfits and their
affiliates such as The Resistance Front („TRF‟), People Against
Fascist Forces („PAFF‟), Mujahideen Gazwatul Hind („MGH‟), etc.
are all active in Jammu & Kashmir („J&K‟) and are being orchestrated
from Pakistan. These organisations and their affiliates are conspiring
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 2 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
both physically and in cyberspace and are planning to undertake
violent terrorist acts in J&K and in major cities of India, including
New Delhi. They, in cohorts with their Pakistan based handlers and
commanders, along with the network of Over-Ground Workers
(„OGWs‟), are also indulging in radicalization of impressionable local
youth for the purpose of recruiting and training them in handling of
arms, ammunition and explosives. The members of the proscribed
terrorist organizations and their affiliates have also conspired to
commit terrorist acts, recruited local youth to become members of
terrorist organizations, and procured arms and ammunition for
terrorism purposes. The members of the above-said proscribed
organizations have conspired to wage war against the Government of
India.
5. Based on the above information, FIR No. RC-29/2021/NIA/DLI
dated 10.10.2021 was registered by the National Investigation Agency
(hereinafter referred to as, „NIA‟) under Sections 120B, 121A, 122
and 123 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as,
„IPC‟) and Sections 18, 18A, 18B, 20, 38 and 39 of the Unlawful
Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as, „UAPA‟).
6. The appellant was arrested on 22.10.2021 and a search was
conducted at her residence, where, it is alleged, incriminating material
in the form of several diaries wherein she had made handwritten notes
pertaining to establishment of Shariyat Law, Islamic State Ideology
and other Jihadi material were recovered. It is further alleged that an
Islamic State Flag was also recovered from her house.
7. Based on further investigation, the NIA filed the first
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 3 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
chargesheet on 08.04.2022, naming 26 accused persons, out of which
one was separately charge-sheeted, being a juvenile. Out of the 26
accused persons, the appellant herein was arrayed as accused no.17
and was charged with Sections 120B and 121A of the IPC read with
Sections 18, 20, 38 and 39 of the UAPA.
8. A supplementary chargesheet under Sections 120B, 121A, 122,
123 of the IPC read with Sections 18, 18A, 18B, 20, 38 and 39 of the
UAPA was filed by the NIA on 20.03.2023. Vide the said
supplementary chargesheet, the NIA cited 51 additional witnesses and
55 additional documents in support, and named one additional
accused.
9. The first application filed by the appellant seeking bail was
withdrawn by her on 18.01.2022. Her second application was
dismissed on merits by the learned Trial Court by a speaking order
dated 03.02.2023, wherein the learned Trial Court found a prima facie
case against the appellant.
10. The appellant thereafter filed a third application seeking bail on
20.12.2025, which was dismissed by the learned Trial Court vide the
impugned order dated 14.05.2026.
11. The learned Trial Court, while dismissing the third bail
application, observed that there was no material change in
circumstances since the dismissal of the appellant‟s second bail
application and that there was a prima facie case against the appellant
indicating that she had conspired with the co-accused persons for the
commission of a terrorist act. The learned Trial Court also observed
that the trial had proceeded in a reasonable manner and, therefore, the
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 4 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
appellant‟s long incarceration was rejected as a ground for grant of
bail.
Submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant-Sobiya Aziz
12. The learned counsel for the appellant Sobiya Aziz submits that
the appellant Sobiya Aziz is presently 33 years old and has no other
criminal antecedents. The appellant Sobiya Aziz has already spent
almost 5 years of incarceration and there is no chance of the trial
ending soon. He submits that only on this ground, she is entitled to be
released on bail. In this regard, he places reliance on the judgments of
the Supreme Court in Gulfisha Fatima v. State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) ,
2026 SCC OnLine SC 10; Syed Iftikhar Andrabi v. National
Investigation Agency, Jammu, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 881; and,
Union of India v. K.A. Najeeb , (2021) 3 SCC 713.
13. He submits that being a woman, the appellant Sobiya Aziz even
otherwise is entitled to bail. In support, he places reliance on the
judgment of the Supreme Court dated 12.01.2026 in SLP (CRL.)
No.11095/2025, titled “ Alemla Jamir v. NIA” .
14. He submits that the appellant is also suffering from various
ailments, as is reflected from her medical report dated 20.08.2026
submitted by the Superintendent, Central Jail No.6, Tihar, in
compliance with the directions of this Court in its order dated
17.08.2026.
15. He submits that though the appellant stands charged under
Sections 120B and 121A of the IPC and Section 18 of the UAPA, she
has been discharged of offences under Sections 20, 38 and 39 of the
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 5 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
UAPA vide the order dated 20.08.2024 passed by the learned Trial
Court. She has been suffering incarceration since 22.10.2021 and
presently, out of the 359 cited witnesses, only 21 witnesses have been
examined by the prosecution.
16. He submits that the allegations made by the prosecution in the
chargesheet, or in the testimonies of PW-250/ Khursheed Ahmad
Ganie Ganie @ Jahangir Ahmad Ganie , PW-256/ Tariq Ahmed
Hajam , PW-268/ Rukiyah Jan and the protected witness, PW- X5 , or in
the documents D-38, D-163 and D-184, that is, the statements of the
co-accused Bilal Ahmed Mir, or in the diaries recovered from the
appellant Sobiya Aziz, do not make out a prima facie case against the
appellant Sobiya Aziz. He submits that the appellant Sobiya Aziz has
been involved in this case only because she happens to be the sister of
a militant who died in an encounter. Only for this reason, the appellant
cannot be made to suffer such long incarceration. In support, he places
reliance on the judgments in Dr. Anand Teltumbde v. National
Investigation Agency & Anr. , 2022 SCC OnLine Bom 5174, and
Ammar Abdul Rahiman v. National Investigation Agency ,
2024:DHC:3637-DB.
17. He submits that one of the grave allegations made against the
appellant Sobiya Aziz is that she was involved in transporting a
militant, however, the same is only based on the statement of PW- X5
who, at best, can state that she was also present in the car along with
PW- X5 in which some arms were being transported. He submits that,
however, just like PW- X5, the appellant was not aware of the contents
of the box which was lying in the car, and there exists no evidence to
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 6 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
show that she was aware of the same.
18. Placing reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sujit
Tiwari v. State of Gujarat & Anr. , (2020) 13 SCC 447; the judgments
of this Court in Galiv Hussain v. State GNCT of Delhi ,
2023:DHC:2788, and Saneesh Soman v. Narcotics Control Bureau ,
2025 SCC OnLine Del 4994; and of the High Court of Gujarat in
Union of India v. State of Gujarat , 2022 SCC OnLine Guj 1533, he
submits that as far as the statements of PW-250/ Khursheed Ahmad
Ganie Ganie @ Jahangir Ahmad Ganie , PW-256/ Tariq Ahmed
Hajam , and PW-268/ Rukiyah Jan are concerned, they do not, in any
manner, sustain the case of the prosecution.
19. Regarding the recovered diaries, he submits that even if there
was some complained material written in the personal diary by the
appellant Sobiya Aziz, the same also does not further the allegations
raised against her, as there is no evidence that she had ever
disseminated or shared such objectionable writings in public domain.
20. He submits that there are other co-accused who had been
released on bail, not only by the learned Trial Court but by this Court
as well. In this regard, he places reliance on the judgment of the
Supreme Court dated 22.05.2026 in SLP (CRL.) 83/2024, titled
Suhail Ahmad Thokar v. National Investigation Agency ; the
judgment of this Court in Haris Nisar Langoo v. National
Investigation Agency , 2026:DHC:2317-DB; and the orders dated
02.01.2023, 03.05.2023, 26.07.2023 and 20.04.2024 of the learned
Trial Court in SC No. 02/2022 and RC No. 29/2021/NIA/DLI, titled
NIA v. Tariq Ahmad Dar & Ors. .
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 7 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
Submissions of the learned SPP
21. On the other hand, Mr.Tiwari, the learned SPP for the
respondent, vehemently submits that the appellant Sobiya Aziz is part
of a larger conspiracy to wage war against India and to help and
support terrorist activities. He takes us through the statements of PW-
250/ Khursheed Ahmad Ganie Ganie @ Jahangir Ahmad Ganie , PW-
256/ Tariq Ahmed Hajam , PW-268/ Rukiyah Jan and the protected
witness, PW- X5 , the disclosure statements of co-accused Bilal Ahmed
Mir contained in D-38, and D-184, the contents of the diaries of the
appellant Sobiya Aziz, as also the handwriting expert report, to submit
that the charge against the appellant Sobiya Aziz is substantiated.
22. He submits that even otherwise as the charge stands framed
against the appellant, this Court would not be justified in finding that
no prima facie case exists against the appellant, which is a condition
precedent under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA for grant of bail.
23. He further submits that PW-21/ Tariq Ahmed Hajam has stated
before the learned Trial Court during his further examination-in-chief
on 19.08.2026 that he has received information from an official of the
Deputy Inspector General of Police that there is a death threat to him,
as a hit order has been issued against him by the TRF. He submits that
therefore, the appellant should not be enlarged on bail as there is a
possibility of her threatening the witnesses and prejudicing the trial.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
24. We have considered the submissions made by the learned
counsels for the parties.
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 8 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
25. It remains undisputed that the appellant Sobiya Aziz has been in
custody since 22.10.2021 and has, therefore, already suffered
incarceration for almost 5 years. Presently, only 21 witnesses have
been examined, out of total cited 359 witnesses. Therefore, there is no
chance of the trial concluding anytime soon.
26. In Khuram Parvez (supra), we had considered the law relating
to the effect of delay in the trial on the Fundamental Rights of the
accused under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and the balance
to be achieved between this Right and the restrictions on bail
contained in Section 43D(5) of the UAPA. We would quote from the
said judgment as under:
“ 52. In K.A. Najeeb (supra), the Supreme
Court considering the balance to be achieved
between the Fundamental Right of an accused
for a speedy trial vis-à-vis the restrictions
imposed under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA on
release of the accused on bail, held that these
restrictions do not oust the ability of the
constitutional courts to grant bail on grounds
of violation of Part III of the Constitution. It
held that whereas at the commencement of
proceedings, the courts are expected to
appreciate the legislative policy against grant
of bail, however, these restrictions will melt
down where there is no likelihood of the trial
being completed within a reasonable time and
the period of incarceration already undergone
has exceeded a substantial part of the
prescribed sentence. It was further held that
Section 43D(5) of UAPA is comparatively less
stringent than Section 37 of the Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985,
where the court needs to be satisfied that
prima facie the accused is not guilty and that
he is unlikely to commit another offence while
on bail. Instead, Section 43D(5) of the UAPA
merely provides another possible ground for
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 9 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
the court to refuse bail, in addition to the well-
settled considerations like gravity of offence,
etc.. We quote from the judgment as under:
“ 17. It is thus clear to us that the
presence of statutory restrictions like
Section 43-D(5) of the UAPA per se does
not oust the ability of the constitutional
courts to grant bail on grounds of
violation of Part III of the Constitution.
Indeed, both the restrictions under a
statute as well as the powers exercisable
under constitutional jurisdiction can be
well harmonised. Whereas at
commencement of proceedings, the
courts are expected to appreciate the
legislative policy against grant of bail
but the rigours of such provisions will
melt down where there is no likelihood
of trial being completed within a
reasonable time and the period of
incarceration already undergone has
exceeded a substantial part of the
prescribed sentence. Such an approach
would safeguard against the possibility
of provisions like Section 43-D(5) of the
UAPA being used as the sole metric for
denial of bail or for wholesale breach of
constitutional right to speedy trial.
18. Adverting to the case at hand, we are
conscious of the fact that the charges
levelled against the respondent are
grave and a serious threat to societal
harmony. Had it been a case at the
threshold, we would have outrightly
turned down the respondent's prayer.
However, keeping in mind the length of
the period spent by him in custody and
the unlikelihood of the trial being
completed anytime soon, the High Court
appears to have been left with no other
option except to grant bail. An attempt
has been made to strike a balance
between the appellant's right to lead
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 10 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
evidence of its choice and establish the
charges beyond any doubt and
simultaneously the respondent's rights
guaranteed under Part III of our
Constitution have been well protected.
19. Yet another reason which persuades
us to enlarge the respondent on bail is
that Section 43-D(5) of the UAPA is
comparatively less stringent than Section
37 of the NDPS Act. Unlike the NDPS
Act where the competent court needs to
be satisfied that prima facie the accused
is not guilty and that he is unlikely to
commit another offence while on bail;
there is no such precondition under
UAPA. Instead, Section 43-D(5) of the
UAPA merely provides another possible
ground for the competent court to refuse
bail, in addition to the well-settled
considerations like gravity of the
offence, possibility of tampering with
evidence, influencing the witnesses or
chance of the accused evading the trial
by absconsion, etc.”
53. The above judgment and various others of
the Supreme Court were considered by the
Supreme Court in Gulfisha (supra), and the
Supreme Court framed the question to be
considered as “in prosecution under the
UAPA, when delay and prolonged
incarceration are invoked as grounds for bail,
what is the principled approach by which a
constitutional court is to examine such a
plea.”
54. In answer to the above question, the
Supreme Court held as under:
“ 30. Article 21 occupies a central place
in the constitutional scheme. The right to
life and personal liberty, and the
insistence that any deprivation must
conform to procedure established by
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 11 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
law, are foundational guarantees. The
right to a speedy trial has been
recognised as an important facet of this
guarantee. It follows that pre-trial
incarceration cannot, by the mere
passage of time, be permitted to assume
the character of punishment.
31 . At the same time, Article 21 has
never been understood as operating in
isolation from law. The constitutional
promise is not that liberty will be
unregulated, but that deprivations of
liberty will not be arbitrary,
unconscionable, or unfair. The
expression “procedure established by
law” reflects that balance. The UAPA,
as a special statute enacted to address
offences alleged to affect the security of
the State and the stability of civic life,
represents a legislative judgment as to
the conditions under which bail may be
granted at the pre-trial stage. Section
43D(5) of UAPA embodies the exercise
of that judgment.
32 . In Union of India v. K.A. Najeeb ,
this Court recognised a constitutional
safeguard that cannot be ignored:
statutory restrictions cannot be applied
so as to render the guarantee of personal
liberty illusory. It was held that where
the trial is not likely to commence or
conclude within a reasonable period,
constitutional courts retain the
jurisdiction to grant bail
notwithstanding statutory restraints. The
decision thus operates as a protection
against unconscionable detention and
there can be no second opinion on the
said principle.
33 . The same decision, however, does
not indicate as laying down a
mechanical rule under which the mere
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 12 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
passage of time becomes determinative
in every case arising under a special
statute. The jurisprudence of this Court
does not support a construction whereby
delay simpliciter eclipses a statutory
regime enacted by Parliament to address
offences of a special category.
34 . The constitutional inquiry into delay
is not an inquiry into guilt. It is an
inquiry into whether continued detention
remains constitutionally permissible in
the circumstances of the case. That
inquiry is necessarily contextual.
Context includes the nature of the
allegation, the statutory field, the stage
of the proceedings, the realistic
trajectory of the trial, the causes
contributing to delay, and the risks
attendant upon release. Delay cannot be
detached from these considerations and
treated as a solitary determinant.
35 . The proper constitutional question,
therefore, is not whether Article 21 is
superior to Section 43D (5). The proper
question is how Article 21 is to be
applied where Parliament has expressly
conditioned the grant of bail in relation
to offences alleged to implicate national
security. The law does not contemplate
an either-or approach. Nor does it
contemplate an unstructured blending of
statutory and constitutional
considerations. What is required is
disciplined judicial scrutiny that gives
due regard to both.
xxx
101 . It is well recognised that Article 21
rights, though not absolute, require the
State and the Court to justify continued
custody with reference to the specific
individual before it. Treating all accused
identically irrespective of their roles
would risk transforming pre-trial
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 13 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
detention into a punitive mechanism
divorced from individual circumstances.
The constitutional mandate demands a
differentiated inquiry: where prolonged
custody disproportionately burdens
those whose roles are limited, the
balance between individual liberty and
collective security may call for
conditional release, while the same
balance may tilt differently for those
alleged to have orchestrated the
offence.”
55. The Supreme Court also examined the
principles governing the scope of judicial
inquiry under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA at
the bail stage, and held as under:
“ 80. From the foregoing discussion,
certain propositions governing the
application of Section 43D(5) emerge
with clarity. First , the provision
embodies a deliberate legislative
departure from ordinary bail
jurisprudence, premised upon the
distinctive nature of offences under
Chapters IV and VI of the Act. Second ,
the expression “prima facie true”
mandates a threshold judicial inquiry
which is neither perfunctory nor
adjudicatory, requiring the Court to
examine whether the prosecution
material, taken at face value, discloses
the essential statutory ingredients of the
alleged offence. Third , the inquiry is
necessarily accused-specific, directed to
the role and attribution qua the
individual, and does not admit of
collective or undifferentiated treatment
merely because allegations arise from a
common transaction or
conspiracy. Fourth , the bail stage under
Section 43D(5) is not a forum for
evaluating defences, weighing evidence,
or conducting a mini-trial; judicial
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 14 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
restraint at this stage is not an
abdication of duty but a fulfilment of the
statutory mandate. These propositions,
read together, define the contours of
judicial power and responsibility under
the provision.
81. The correct application of Section
43D(5), therefore, requires the Court to
undertake a structured inquiry confined
to the following:
i. whether the prosecution material,
accepted as it stands, discloses a
prima facie case satisfying the
statutory ingredients of the offence
alleged;
ii. whether the role attributed to the
accused reflects a real and
meaningful nexus to the unlawful
activity or terrorist activity
proscribed under the Act, as
distinguished from mere association
or peripheral presence; and
iii. whether the statutory threshold is
crossed qua the individual accused,
without embarking upon an
assessment reserved after full-fledged
trial.
82. Where these requirements are met,
the statutory restraint on the grant of
bail must operate with full force; where
they are not, the embargo stands lifted.
This approach preserves the legislative
purpose of the Act, and ensures that the
exceptional nature of the bail regime
under Section 43D(5) is neither diluted
by overreach nor distorted by
mechanical application.”
56. The correctness of the above judgment,
insofar as interplay between Article 21 of the
Constitution of India and Section 43D(5) of
the UAPA is concerned, has been doubted by
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 15 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
the Supreme Court in Syed Iftikhar Andrabi v.
National Investigation Agency, Jammu, 2026
INSC 503. It explained K.A. Najeeb (supra),
as under:
“31. In K.A. Najeeb, a three-Judge
Bench of this Court was clear and
unequivocal in holding that once it is
obvious that a timely trial would not be
possible and the accused has suffered
incarceration for a significant period of
time, the courts would ordinarily be
obligated to enlarge the accused on bail.
We have already extracted supra
paragraph 17 of the said judgment
where it has been clearly stated that the
presence of statutory restrictions like
Section 43D(5) of the UAP Act per se
does not oust the ability of the
constitutional courts to grant bail on
grounds of violation of Part III of the
Constitution. Whereas at the
commencement of the proceedings, the
courts are expected to appreciate the
legislative policy against grant of bail
but the rigors of such provisions will
„melt down‟ where there is no likelihood
of the trial being completed within a
reasonable time and the period of
incarceration already undergone has
exceeded a substantial part of the
prescribed sentence. In the facts of that
case, this Court observed that it was
conscious of the fact that the charges
levelled against the accused were grave
and a serious threat to societal harmony
and had it been the case at the threshold,
perhaps the Court would have outrightly
rejected such a prayer. However,
keeping in mind the duration of
incarceration and the unlikelihood of the
trial being completed in the near future,
the accused had to be enlarged on bail.
xxx
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 16 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
35. The often invoked phrase „bail is the
rule and jail is the exception‟ is not
merely an empty statutory slogan
flowing from the CrPC as Gurwinder
has stated. It is a constitutional principle
flowing from Articles 21 and 22 of the
Constitution and the presumption of
innocence which is the cornerstone of
any civilised society governed by the
rule of law. Statutes may undoubtedly
calibrate the manner in which that
principle is applied, particularly in cases
involving national security or terrorist
offences for which the UAP Act is meant,
but those cannot altogether invert the
constitutional relationship between
liberty and detention. The statutory
embargo of Section 43-D(5) must remain
a circumscribed restriction that operates
subject to the guarantee of Articles 21
and 22 of the Constitution. Therefore, we
have no manner of doubt in stating that
even under the UAP Act, „bail is the rule
and jail is the exception‟; of course, in
an appropriate case, bail can be denied
having regard to the facts of that
particular case.”
57. Further, while highlighting the low
conviction rate in UAPA, the Supreme Court
opined that:-
“42.3. Thus, from the aforesaid figures,
it is evident that the country-wide
percentage of conviction under the UAP
Act for the five years comprising the
period 2019-23 hovers between 2% to
6%. In other words, there is 94% to 98%
possibility of acquittal in such cases in
the country. When it comes to the Union
Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, the
percentage of conviction is abysmal, to
say the least. For the aforesaid period,
the annual rate of conviction is always
less than 1%. It means that at the end of
the trial, there is 99% possibility of
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 17 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
acquittal in such cases. With these kind
of statistics staring at our face, the
question is, should we continue the
detention of the appellant or defer the
consideration to a later stage, simply
because the charges are serious?”
58. We must also note that this issue
concerning the interplay between Article 21 of
the Constitution and Section 43D(5) of the
UAPA Act, has now been referred to a larger
Bench in Tasleem Ahmed v. State Govt. of
NCT of Delhi (order dated 22.05.2026 passed
by the Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.)
2867/2026). In the said order, the Supreme
Court has observed that delay cannot be the
sole ground for releasing the accused on bail
and that the inquiry into delay is contextual
and must take into account the nature of the
allegations, the statutory field, the stage of the
proceedings, the realistic trajectory of the
trial, the causes contributing to the delay, the
role attributed to the accused, the prima facie
material, the availability of intermediate
safeguards, and the risks attendant upon
release. It has further observed as under: -
“ 20. We are also conscious that an
unqualified reading of the proposition
that lapse of time by itself must compel
bail in every case under the UAPA may
have serious consequences. Such an
approach may leave little room for
courts to examine the nature of
allegations, centrality of role, protected
witnesses, risk of intimidation,
possibility of reactivation of networks,
nature of delay and whether such delay
is attributable to the accused
himself/herself, public order concerns
and national security implications. On
the other hand, an equally unqualified
insistence on Section 43D(5) without
regard to prolonged incarceration would
imperil Article 21. The Constitution does
not command either extreme. It is this
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 18 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
precise issue that may warrant attention
of the appropriate bench dealing with
the issues.
21. The question, therefore, is not
whether Article 21 survives Section
43D(5). It undoubtedly does. The true
question is how Article 21 is to be
applied in a statutory field where
Parliament has consciously imposed
restrictions on bail in respect of offences
alleged to affect the security of the State
and the stability of civic life.
22. We clarify that nothing in this order
is intended to whittle down, dilute, read
narrowly, or detract from the authority
of K.A. Najeeb. ...”
59. In the said order, after having referred the
issue to the larger Bench, the Supreme Court
still went on to consider the case of the
appellant therein for bail and, taking into
account the substantial period of incarceration
already undergone by the appellant therein,
released the appellant on interim bail for a
period of 6 months.
60. In Union Territory of Ladakh and Ors. v.
Jammu and Kashmir National Conference
and Anr., (2024) 18 SCC 643, the Supreme
Court has also held that merely because a
question of law is referred to a larger Bench,
the High Court must not refrain from
considering the matter before it in accordance
with the law binding on it. It has opined as
under:
“ 35. We are seeing before us judgments
and orders by High Courts not deciding
cases on the ground that the leading
judgment of this Court on this subject is
either referred to a larger Bench or a
review petition relating thereto is
pending. We have also come across
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 19 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
examples of High Courts refusing
deference to judgments of this Court on
the score that a later coordinate Bench
has doubted its correctness. In this
regard, we lay down the position in law.
We make it absolutely clear that the
High Courts will proceed to decide
matters on the basis of the law as it
stands. It is not open, unless specifically
directed by this Court, to await an
outcome of a reference or a review
petition, as the case may be. It is also not
open to a High Court to refuse to follow
a judgment by stating that it has been
doubted by a later coordinate Bench. In
any case, when faced with conflicting
judgments by Benches of equal strength
of this Court, it is the earlier one which
is to be followed by the High Courts, as
held by a 5-Judge Bench in National
Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi. The
High Courts, of course, will do so with
careful regard to the facts and
circumstances of the case before it.””
27. In Alemla Jamir (supra), the Supreme Court, taking into
account the long period of incarceration of the appellant therein and
the fact that the appellant was a lady, granted bail to the appellant
therein.
28. In the medical report of appellant Sobiya Aziz dated 20.08.2026
received from the Superintendent, Central Jail No.6, Tihar, it has been
reported that the appellant has a follow-up case of „ Chronic Headache
(on & off) /Moderate Anemia/ Uterine Fibroids with abnormal uterine
bleeding, recurrent Urinary tract infection and Left Thyroid nodules .‟
Though the said report states that the appellant has stable vitals, is
being regularly followed-up by Jail visiting specialists and doctors
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 20 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
from AIIMS Hospital, and is being given all prescribed medicines, the
fact remains that, admittedly, she is suffering from various ailments.
29. The co-accused, namely, Mohd. Manan Dar (accused no. 13),
Mateen Ahmed Bhatt (accused no. 10), Rauf Ahmad Bhat (accused
no. 16), and Adil Ahmed War (accused no. 26) have been granted bail
by the learned Trial Court, while co-accused Haris Nisar Langoo
(accused no. 15), and Zamin Adil Bhat (accused no. 14) have been
granted bail by this Court and co-accused Suhail Ahmad Thokar
(accused no. 25) has been released on bail by the Supreme Court after
taking into consideration his long period of incarceration and the fact
that conclusion of the trial may take some considerable time.
30. Keeping in view the fact that the appellant Sobiya Aziz has
been in long incarceration of almost 5 years; is a lady; is suffering
from various ailments; and the trial is not likely to conclude anytime
soon, we are of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be released
on bail.
31. Even otherwise, we find that in the chargesheet, the appellant
Sobiya Aziz has been made an accused on the following averments:
“ 17.28 During the investigation it has been
established that the arrested accused Bilal
Ahmed Mir @ Bilal Fafoo (A-3) had a close
association with arrested co-accused namely
Sobiya Aziz Mir (A-17), who is the sister of
killed terrorist of Islamic State Jammu &
Kashmir (ISJK). Bilal Ahmed Mir @Bilal
Fafoo (A-3), later conspired with Sobiya Aziz
Mir (A-17), to establish contacts with other
cadres of Islamic State Jammu & Kashmir
(ISJK) and provide necessary over ground
support to the active cadres. Investigation has
also brought on record that Bilal Ahmed Mir
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 21 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
@ Bilal Fafoo (A-3) also assisted Sobiya Aziz
Mir (A-17) in transportation of a active
terrorist namely, Zahid Das to Srinagar.
17.29 During the search of premises of the
accused Sobiya Aziz Mir (A-17) several diaries
having incriminating handwritten content with
regard to establishment of Shariat Law,
Islamic State (IS) ideology and other Jihadi
content were recovered. During the
investigation, handwriting sample of the
arrested accused Sobiya Aziz Mir (A-17) was
taken and sent for forensic examination and
matching. Furthermore, an Islamic State (IS)
flag was also recovered from the possession of
accused Sobiya Aziz Mir (A-17) which
establishes strong inclination of the accused
towards violent Jihadi ideology.
Image:- Islamic State Flag recovered from
premises of accused A-17
17.30 During the investigation, it has emerged
by way of statement of number of witnesses
that the arrested accused Bilal Ahmad Mir @
Bilal Fafoo (A-3) along with Mohammad
Abbas Sheikh were involved in a deep-rooted
conspiracy with the co-accused Tariq Ahmed
Dar (A-5), Tariq Ahmed Bafanda (A-6),
Haneef Chairalu (A-8) and Sobiya Aziz Mir
(A-17) in order to facilitate movement of
weaponry, assist active cadres to operate and
for motivation of local youths to join the so
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 22 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
called armed struggle for Freedom of
Kashmir.
xxx
17.114 Role and activities of / offences
established against Sobiya Aziz Mir (A- 17)
Accused Sobiya Aziz Mir (A-17) knowingly
entered into a conspiracy hatched by terrorist
commander based across the border as well as
active terrorist commanders and their
associates i.e. co-accused person in the valley
along with other co-accused persons to
commit multiple terrorist attacks in the valley.
The accused Sobiya Aziz Mir (A-17) was
actively working for the ideology of terrorist
organisation and advocates the ideology of
proscribed terrorist organization. The accused
Sobiya Aziz Mir (A-17) was also involved in
provide shelters to active cadres of banned
terrorist outfits. Therefore, as per the
averments made hereinabove/ in the pre-
paragraphs, it is established that the accused
Sobiya Aziz Mir (A-17) criminally conspired
with co-accused persons and others and in
pursuance of the said conspiracy. Sobiya Aziz
Mir (A-17) indulged herself in the criminal
conspiracy hatched by the terrorist
organisations to create unrest and strike terror
in the Kashmir valley and in others parts of
the country.”
32. To substantiate the above allegations against the appellant
Sobiya Aziz, the prosecution primarily placed reliance upon the
disclosure statement of the appellant (D-100), read with the disclosure
statement of co-accused Bilal Ahmed Mir (D-38), and his explanatory
memorandum statement (D-163); the diaries and documents recovered
from the house of the appellant Sobiya Aziz, and the statements of the
PW-250/ Khursheed Ahmad Ganie Ganie @ Jahangir Ahmad Ganie ;
PW-256/ Tariq Ahmed Hajam ; PW-268/ Rukiyah Jan, and PW- X5 .
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 23 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
33. Having perused the above material, we find that though the
prosecution may say that there is some prima facie material to proceed
against the appellant, however, in our view, the appellant still has an
arguable case for grant of bail.
34. As far as the allegation of a death threat to PW-21/ Tariq Ahmed
Hajam is concerned, there is no positive link shown between the threat
to him and the appellant Sobiya Aziz. We are further informed that
PW-21/ Tariq Ahmed Hajam has been partly examined before the
learned Trial Court.
CRL.A. 453/2023
35. As far as this appeal is concerned, the appellant Kamran Ashraf
Reshi has been arrayed as accused no.11 in the chargesheet dated
08.04.2022 filed by the respondent.
36. The appellant Kamran Ashraf Reshi was arrested on
20.10.2021, when he was aged only around 21 years. As per his
nominal roll, he has spent almost 5 years in custody.
37. The allegations against him in the chargesheet are as under:
“ 17.18 Investigation has brought on record
that A-2 on directions of A-1, directly
conspired with arrested accused persons A-3,
A-5, A-6, A-8, A-17, A-20, A-22, A-23 and A-
24 to assist active cadres associated with
proscribed terrorist organizations and their
newly formed frontal organizations, whereas
the other arrested accused persons A-4, A-9,
A-10, A-11, A-12, A-13, A-14, A-15, A-16, A-
18, A-20, A-21, A-25, A-26 and A-27, acting as
hybrid cadres or lone wolf operators, got
associated with online propaganda groups
floated by various Pakistan based handlers of
proscribed terrorist organizations on
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 24 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
directions of A-1, A-2 and other commanders
of the 'United Jihad Council'. Due care was
taken by A-1 and A-2 to ensure that all the
other terrorists in this conspiracy did not know
much about each other so that even if one of
these was arrested, security agencies could not
identify and locate other conspirators involved
in the larger conspiracy.
xxx
17.65 Investigation has also brought on record
that the Pakistan based handler, namely "Haq
Parast @ Abu Hamza", LeT Commander
associated with the frontal organization, The
Resistance Front (TRF), for whom the accused
Rayid Bashir was working as an Over Ground
Worker / hybrid cadre, was also handling
other co-accused persons namely Kamran
Ashraf Reshi (A-11) of Hazratbal, Rouf Ahmed
Bhat (A-16) of Anantnag and co-accused Adil
Ahmed War (A-26) of Soura, Srinagar.
Image: Screenshots of the chats retrieved
from the digital device of the accused A-12.
17.66 During the investigation it has also
emerged that the accused Kamran Asharf
Reshi (A-11) was also associated with several
online propaganda groups linked to frontal
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 25 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
organizations of the proscribed terrorist
organization, namely, The Resistance Front
(TRF) and was in association with a number of
Pakistan based handlers of proscribed
terrorist organizations Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT)
and Hizbul Mujahideen (HM) including one
LeT commander "Haq Parast".
17.67 Investigation has also revealed that
arrested accused Kamran Ashraf Reshi (A-11)
was associated with one Ashraf Mallah
resident of Ganipura Khimber, Srinagar who
was an active terrorist of Hizbul Mujahideen,
who used to hand over the posters of Hizbul
Mujahideen and AI-Jihad to paste in his
locality to threaten the Government officials,
local shopkeepers and police informers.
Several incriminating documents including
posters have been seized from the premises
search of arrersted accused Kamran Ashraf
Reshi (A-11) which corroborate the fact that
the accused was associated with terrorist off-
shoots 'Kashmir Janbaaz Force' and 'AI-
Jihad', another terrorist offshoot of Hizbul
Mujahideen and used to paste the posters
containing threats to pro-Indians/Govt.
officials.
Image: Screenshots of the poster recovered
from premises of the accused A-11.
17.68 During the course of investigation, it
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 26 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
has been revealed that the accused Kamran
Ashraf Reshi (A-11) also attended radicalizing
lectures of Moulvi Bashir in Iqra Masjid,
Firdausabad, Batmaloo on the instance of
active militant namely, Ashraf Mallah, where
he got associated with arrested co-accused
Arif Farooq Bhat (A-27) and Manan Gulzar
Dar (A-13). The moulvi namely, "Bashir
Moulvi" in Iqra Masjid used to radicalise the
youths towards armed Jihad for cause of
Kashmir.”
Submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant
38. The learned counsel for the appellant Kamran Ashraf Reshi,
while reiterating the submissions made by the learned counsel for
appellant Sobiya Aziz on the ground of delay in the trial as also on the
other co-accused persons being enlarged on bail, further submits that
there is no material on record to associate appellant-Kamran Ashraf
Reshi with the Telegram group, namely, Abu Zamzam. He submits
that there is also no evidence on record to show that the appellant has
ever shared any Jihadi videos or radical messages on the group. It is
also not alleged that the appellant was involved in any terrorist activity
or any „ operational participation‟ . He submits that there is no
evidence of any contact between the appellant and the accused nos.1
or 2 or with „ Haq Parast @ Abu Hamza ‟. There is no proof of the
appellant being a part of the online groups linked to frontal
organizations or terrorist organisations, or any contact being made
between the co-accused persons and the appellant. He submits that, at
best, the case of the prosecution against the appellant Kamran Ashraf
Reshi is of predominantly digital and non-violent in nature, which
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 27 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
cannot justify such long period of incarceration during trial.
39. As far as the seizure memo regarding a threatening pamphlet
seized from the premises of appellant Kamran Ashraf Reshi is
concerned, the learned counsel submits that the same was seized from
his house and not from the possession of the appellant. He submits
that it is only a single sheet of paper and cannot lead to a long
incarceration of the appellant. He submits that there is no evidence
that the appellant Kamran Ashraf Reshi had any role in preparing the
said pamphlet or even of its circulation.
40. Regarding the allegations of the appellant Kamran Ashraf Reshi
being involved in online propaganda groups, he submits that merely
because in the contact directory of the appellant‟s phone, there were
certain Pakistani numbers saved, cannot be a proof of the fact that
these belong to any proscribed organisations or that any actual contact
was made by the appellant to these numbers. He submits that, in fact,
the main plank of the case of the prosecution is that the appellant
Kamran Ashraf Reshi was part of a Telegram group called „Abu
Zamzam‟, however, in the said group, the phone number of the
appellant Kamran Ashraf Reshi is not seen.
41. He submits that the appellant has been charged only on the
basis of vague testimonies of PW-274/ Sahil Farooq , PW-280 /Amaan
Manzoor Najar and PW-283/ Ubaid Ahmed Kagazgar, which also
cannot lead to any criminal charge against the appellant Kamran
Ashraf Reshi.
42. He submits that the other evidence relied upon by the
prosecution, that is, PW-281/ X-14 and PW-296/ X-9 also is vague and
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 28 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
does not in any manner implicate the appellant Kamran Ashraf Reshi
in any offence under the UAPA.
43. On the statement of PW-314/ Abdul Majeed Nayak and PW-
315/ Mehraj-ud-Din Reshi, he submits that Mudasir Wagay is not an
accused nor is any allegation made in the chargesheet against him. He
submits that PW-315/ Mehraj-ud-Din Reshi is, in fact, the uncle of the
appellant whose testimony, if considered in proper context, will show
that PW-315/ Mehraj-ud-Din Reshi is more of an accused than a
witness.
Submissions of the learned SPP
44. On the other hand, Mr.Tiwari, the learned SPP for the NIA,
while reiterating his submissions that mere ground of delay in trial
cannot lead to the appellant being enlarged on bail, given the
allegations against him and the fact that the charges also stand framed
against him in the trial, further reiterates that merely because other co-
accused have been enlarged on bail, also cannot give a ground to the
appellant to seek bail especially when the allegations against him are
distinct and more serious in nature.
45. He submits that from the appellant Kamran Ashraf Reshi, two
mobile phones and one threatening pamphlet were recovered. In the
contact book of the mobile phone, he had saved mobile numbers from
Pakistan which are believed to be belonging to proscribed
organisations threatening the sovereignty of the country. He submits
that there is also evidence of the appellant visiting Batmaloo in
August, 2021 along with the co-accused, including Zamin Adil Bhat,
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 29 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
and attending radicalising lectures of Moulvi Bashir. He also refers to
the statements of PW-280/ Amaan Manzoor Najar, PW-281/ X-14 , PW-
314/ Abdul Majeed Nayak , PW-315/ Mehraj-ud-Din Reshi, PW-
274/ Sahil Farooq , PW-283/ Ubaid Ahmed Kagazgar and PW-296/ X-9
to submit that these witnesses have stated about the close connection
between the appellant and other terrorists. They have also spoken
about the appellant being highly radicalised and motivated and being
part of groups that provide provocative material to the administrators
of those groups for further dissemination. The appellant was also in
contact with a person named Arslan Feroz with whom he used to
disseminate radicalising material on the Abu Zamzam Telegram
group. There is also evidence of him being close to Haq Parast @ Abu
Hamza, a commander of LeT and being a part of Abu Zamzam, a
Pakistani Telegram channel.
46. He submits that given the material against the appellant Kamran
Ashraf Reshi, the appellant should not be enlarged on bail.
Analysis and Findings:
47. As far as the long period of incarceration pending trial acting as
a ground for grant of bail is concerned, we have already summarised
the law herein above. In the present case as well, the appellant has
already suffered a long period of custody of almost 5 years pending
trial. There is no chance of the trial ending soon.
48. We have also minutely perused the allegations against the
appellant Kamran Ashraf Reshi, as also the material relied upon by the
NIA against him. While we refrain from giving a detailed account of
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 30 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
the same, as we fear that it may prejudice the trial, we are of the
opinion that given the long period of incarceration of the appellant
juxtaposed against the material alleged against him by the NIA, the
appellant has been able to make out a case for being released on bail.
49. Keeping in view the above, we direct that the appellant(s),
Sobiya Aziz and Kamran Ashraf Reshi, be released on bail in RC
No. 29/2021/NIA/DLI, Police Station NIA, Delhi, in SC No.2/2022
titled “ NIA v. Tariq Ahmad Dar & Ors. ”, subject to the following
conditions:
i. The appellant(s) shall execute a personal bond each in the sum
of Rs. 2,00,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to
the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court;
ii. The appellant(s) shall surrender their passport, if any, before the
learned Trial Court. In case they do not hold a passport, an
affidavit to that effect shall be filed before the learned Trial
Court;
iii. The appellant(s) shall not leave India without the prior
permission of the learned Trial Court. Any application seeking
permission to travel shall disclose the destination, duration, and
purpose of travel, along with complete contact details during
such travel;
iv. The appellant(s) shall use only one mobile phone and/or one
landline number during the course of trial, which shall always
be kept in the switched-on mode. They shall furnish their
current residential address, mobile/landline contact number, and
e-mail address to the Investigating Officer as also to the learned
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 31 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
Trial Court. The appellant(s) shall not change their place of
residence or contact particulars without giving at least seven
days‟ prior written intimation to the Investigating Officer and
the learned Trial Court;
v. The appellant(s) shall cooperate with the trial and appear before
the learned Trial Court on each date of hearing, unless
exempted by the learned Trial Court from such appearance.
vi. The appellant(s) shall not exhibit any conduct that has the effect
of delaying the trial proceedings;
vii. The appellant(s) shall not directly or indirectly contact,
influence, threaten or communicate with any prosecution
witness, protected witness, complainant or person acquainted
with the facts of the case;
viii. The appellant(s) shall not tamper with evidence, electronic
material, records, devices or documents relating to the case;
ix. The appellant(s) shall not make any public statement, including
through print, electronic media or social media, touching upon
the merits of the case, the evidence, the witnesses or the
pending trial;
x. The appellant(s) shall not participate in any activity which may
prejudice public order or the integrity of the trial;
xi. The appellant(s) shall not join any WhatsApp group or other
social media platforms where anti-national material is uploaded
or circulated or propagated. They shall also not
upload/share/disseminate or circulate any anti-national material
on any social media platform or otherwise. They shall also
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 32 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22
furnish an undertaking to this effect before the learned Trial
Court;
xii. The appellant(s) shall report to the Investigating Officer once
every fortnight, or at such intervals as may be directed by the
learned Trial Court. The Investigating Officer shall maintain a
separate register of attendance with respect to each appellant.
50. In the event of the appellant(s) violating any of the conditions
mentioned above, the prosecution will be at liberty to seek
cancellation of bail before the appropriate Court.
51. The impugned orders rejecting the appellants‟ bail applications
are, accordingly, set aside. The appeals are disposed of in the above
terms.
52. It is made clear that the observations made herein shall not be
construed as observations on the merits of the case, as the same have
been made only for the purpose of consideration of bail.
53. A copy of this judgment be sent to the learned Trial Court as
also to the concerned Jail Superintendent for information and
necessary compliance.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J.
RAVINDER DUDEJ A, J.
SEPTEMBER 3, 2026/ ns/Yg
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 453/2023 & CRL.A. 528/2026 Page 33 of 33
Digitally Signed
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:03.09.2026
14:39:22