Long Incarceration Alone Insufficient For Bail In Cases Of Transnational Terrorism: Delhi HC
The observations were made while dismissing the bail plea of Joginder Rana, father of gangster Kala Rana and an alleged member of the Lawrence Bishnoi-organized terror-crime syndicate.
The Delhi High Court has ruled that prolonged incarceration does not automatically justify granting bail in cases involving transnational terrorism and anti-national activities.
The Court emphasized that such cases require a nuanced approach, prioritizing national security over the general considerations of liberty and speedy trial.
“This Court, while acknowledging that speedy trial is a constitutional prescription, observes that in cases involving anti-national activities and terrorism on an international scale, long incarceration in itself ought not to lead to enlargement on bail when facts show involvement in such activities which can have a national and transnational impact,” the Division Bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Dharmesh Sharma stated.
The observations were made while dismissing the bail plea of Joginder Rana, father of gangster Kala Rana and an alleged member of the Lawrence Bishnoi-organized terror-crime syndicate. Rana was charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and the Arms Act.
NIA Opposes Bail on Grounds of Evidence
The National Investigation Agency (NIA) opposed Rana's bail, citing a conspiracy involving a large cache of illegal arms and ammunition found at his residence. The agency highlighted that testimonies from protected witnesses linked Rana to the alleged criminal activities of his son and the terror syndicate.
The Court noted that weapons, expensive mobile phones, and ammunition recovered during a search on September 12, 2022, cast serious doubt on Rana's innocence. "It is not normal or justifiable to find incriminating evidence of this quantity at someone's residence," the Court observed.
Prima Facie Evidence Against Rana
Rejecting Rana’s defense that he was implicated solely due to his son’s alleged involvement, the Court held that the evidence and witness testimonies could not be dismissed at this stage. It also noted Rana’s inability to refute the allegations or explain the presence of the seized items at his home, further undermining his bail plea.
The Court concluded that Rana failed to satisfy the triple test for bail, which includes ensuring that the accused will not abscond, will not tamper with evidence, and poses no risk to society.
“Granting bail at this stage would be detrimental to the safety and security of the country. The allegations against the Appellant are prima facie true, and he has failed to provide a valid explanation for the incriminating evidence,” the Court stated.
The Bench upheld the trial court’s August 2022 order denying bail, underscoring the importance of addressing threats posed by organized crime and terrorism with a strict judicial approach. "Therefore, the opinion of this Court is that the allegations against the Appellant are prima facie true and the Appellant is unable to prove his innocence at this stage or is able to give any valid explanation for the presence of the seized goods at his residence. In view thereof, applying all the tests laid down by the Supreme Court in a catena of judgments, this Court is not inclined to grant bail in the present case. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed and disposed of in the above terms," the Bench said.
Cause Title: Joginder Singh@ Joginder Rana v. National Investigation Agency [Neutral Citation No. 2024: DHC: 310-DB]
Appearance:-
Appellant: Advocates Nishant Rana, Rajani, Manveen Dhanjal, Adarsh Shandilya, Zeba Parveen, Deepak, Shubham Singh, Rajvant, Jatin
Respondent: SPP Rahul Tyagi, Advocates Jatin, Amit Rohilla, Aniket Singh
Click here to read/download the Judgment
