Anis Ahmed vs National Investigation Agency

$~49
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
Date of decision: 5 May, 2026.
th
Uploaded on: 7 May, 2026
+ CRL.A. 333/2026
ANIS AHMED .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Sadan Farasat Sr. Advocate with
Mr. A Nowfal, Ms. Varisha Sharma,
Mr. Shereef KA, Mr. Md Arif Hussain,
Mr. Mansur Ali, Advs.
versus
NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Rahul Tyagi, SPP.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE MADHU JAIN
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant-Anis Ahmed under
Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Act, 2008, inter alia , assailing the
order dated 27th March, 2026 (hereinafter, ‘impugned order’ ) passed by the
ld. Additional Sessions Judge-03, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi District,
Delhi. The present case arises from RC No. 14/2022/NIA/DLI registered at
PS. NIA, New Delhi.
3. Vide the impugned order, the application filed by the Appellant seeking
interim bail has been rejected. The Appellant had sought interim bail on the
ground that his mother and his immediate family is travelling for ‘Haj
Pilgrimage’ and that he would like to meet his family in this context.
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 333/2026 Page 1 of 5
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:07.05.2026
14:59:30

4. The submission of Mr. Shadan Farasat, ld. Senior Counsel for the
Appellant is that Haj Ceremony is a part of the Appellant’s cultural customs
and it is usual for family members to meet and seek blessings especially from
those people who are travelling for the ‘Haj Pilgrimage’ . Hence, the prayer
for interim bail for a period of six days.
5. The prayer for interim bail is opposed by the National Investigation
Agency (hereinafter, ‘NIA’ ). Mr. Tyagi, ld. SPP submits that the Appellant is
a senior member of the Popular Front of India (hereinafter, ‘PFI’ ) which is a
banned organization. According to the ld. SPP, the Appellant has played a
very important role in the administration of the said organisation.
6. The apprehension on behalf of the NIA is that releasing the Appellant
on interim bail and especially for attending a cultural function surrounding
the ‘Haj Pilgrimage’ would enable the Appellant to interact with several
members of the community as well and could also result in a threat to the
security of the country. Ld. SPP also submits that the Appellant is likely to
create disturbances and disharmony.
7. The Court has considered the matter. In paragraph 17.36.3 of the
charge-sheet dated 18th March, 2023, the role of the Appellant has been
described as under:
“ 17.36.3 Role of accused Anis Ahmed (A-3), S/o
Ahmed Moosa, aged 39 years r/o Karnataka
A-3 was a Member of NBC since 2012 and had also been
the Secretary and General Secretary of PFI. As the
office bearer of PFI at the national level, A-3 had been
involved in overseeing all the administrative work of
the organization . Investigation has revealed that as a
member of NEC, A-3 along with co-accused persons
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 333/2026 Page 2 of 5
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:07.05.2026
14:59:30

was involved in criminal conspiracy and played a
pivotal role in instigating the gullible Muslim youth by
communalization of issues like Gujarat riots, alleged
atrocities against Muslims with the intention to create a
communal wedge in the society and to portray the entire
State machinery as against a particular religious
community. Further, it is also established that A-3
during the provocative speeches, was found giving
open calls to PFI cadres for identification of local
leaders of a particular organisation, who is against the
ideology of PFI. It also surfaced during investigation
that senior PFI leaders including Anis Ahmed (A-3)
used to visit the terror camps conducted at Freedom
Hall, Mittur, Karnataka and at other places in the
country across India to review the progress of weapons
training and motivated participants to create a PFI
army and to wage war against the Government of India
and establish Islamic Caliphate by 2047.A-3 was also
involved in planning for procurement of fire arms for
PFI.
Further, A-3 along with other NEC members,
conducted meetings at PFI office, Shaheen Bagh,
Delhi to formulate and oversee the policies of PFI
including expansion of PFI through radicalising and
recruiting young muslims, providing weapons training
classes across the country through Beginners and
Advance training classes, collection of funds and
facilitating funds to persons for commission of terrorist
activities. A-3 was in charge and responsible for the
conduct of all the illegal activities of PFI and was
involved in conspiracy to commit unlawful violent
terrorist acts .
Investigation has established that A-3 had been
trying to provoke muslims by using derogatory
comments against the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India
by alleging that the Babri Masjid Verdict of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court was not written in the Hon’ble Court,
but was written at xxxxxxx and the Hon'ble judges only
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 333/2026 Page 3 of 5
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:07.05.2026
14:59:30

pronounced it. A-3 was found to be involved in creating
communal disharmony in the society and disrupting the
sovereignty and integrity of India.
Based on the above evidences, A-3 has committed
u/s 120B,121A, 122, 153A, 505 of IPC,
sec.13,17,18,18A,18B, 22C of UA(P)A.”
8. A perusal of the above would show that the Appellant is an office bearer
of PFI at the national level and was overseeing all the administrative work of
the said organisation across the country. According to the said charge-sheet,
the Appellant was also involved in radicalising and recruiting muslims and
providing weapon training. The activities of the PFI were being actively run
by the Appellant, who is also alleged to be in conspiracy with unlawful
organisations and also involved in unlawful terrorist acts.
9. Mr. Farasat, ld. Senior Counsel for the Appellant submits that the said
charges against the Appellant are not true and in fact, the weapons referred in
the said charge-sheet are self-defence weapons.
10. In the past, the role of PFI has been discussed by this Court in the
decision in O.M.A Salam v. National Investigation Agency,
2024:DHC:6552-DB . This Court in the said decision had also considered the
observations made by the High Court of Kerala in respect of PFI as an
organisation and the kind of mass disturbance that was created on the ground
when the leaders and other members of the PFI were arrested.
11. The Court has considered the overall facts. While there can be no doubt
that the ‘Haj Pilgrimage’ is a religious piligrimage which is of immense
importance and is a very pious trip for those who are undertaking it, the mere
travel of family members for the ‘Haj Pilgrimage’ and for the Appellant to
meet them is not sufficient ground to release the Appellant on interim bail. In
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 333/2026 Page 4 of 5
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:07.05.2026
14:59:30

the opinion of this Court there are various apprehensions considering the
position that the Appellant was holding. Moreover, grant of interim bail
entails the travel of the Appellant from Delhi to Bangalore, which could also
result in security threat at the airports etc.
12. Under these circumstances, the prayer for interim bail is rejected and
appeal is dismissed.
13. Needless to add, this Court has not gone into the merits of the
allegations at this stage. The only thing the Court has examined is whether in
light of the allegations made, the prayer for interim bail is made out or not in
terms of Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.
Considering the role of the Appellant as set out in the charge-sheet, and the
role of the Appellant in the PFI organisation, this Court is not inclined to
release the Appellant on interim bail.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
MADHU JAIN
JUDGE
MAY 5, 2026
Rahul/ck
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 333/2026 Page 5 of 5
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:07.05.2026
14:59:30