There Is A Prima Facie Case: Kerala HC Upholds Dismissal Of Bail Applications Of PFI Members Accused In RSS Worker Murder Case
The Kerala High Court dismissed the appeals against the rejection of bail applications filed by the accused in the RSS worker Srinivasan murder case.
The case, which is being investigated by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), alleged that members of the Popular Front of India (PFI) were part of a larger conspiracy to commit terrorist acts as part of their "India 2047" agenda. The accused no. 31, 35, 36, 47, 48, 49 and 55 challenged the dismissal of their bail applications by the Special Court for NIA Cases under Section 439 of the CrPC, invoking Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA).
A Division Bench of Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice K.V. Jayakumar held, “We are of the view that the prosecution has succeeded in showing that the allegations against the appellants in Crl.Appeal No.1842/2024 are prima facie true. On perusal of the available records, it is seen that Abbas (A47) 1st appellant has arranged the motor cycle bearing registration No.KL-9-AQ-713 to the assailants. The assailants used the said vehicle for conducting recce to locate the target and for committing the terrorist act. Noushad (A48) and Basheer (A49) had used the motor cycle bearing registration no.KL-9-AK-6726 during the night of 15.04.2022 and conducted recce of the target. The mobile phone concealed by Ashraf (A44) was recovered as per the disclosure statement of Noushad (A48).”
Advocate E.A. Haris appeared for the Appellants, while Senior Advocate Sasthamangalam S Ajithkumar represented the Respondents.
The NIA’s charge sheet implicated 51 individuals, alleging that the murder was orchestrated to create communal tension and terror in the state.
The High Court held that the prosecution had succeeded in showing that the allegations against the accused were prima facie true. The Bench noted that the Accused no. 47 had arranged the motorcycle to the assailants. The assailants used the said vehicle for conducting recce to locate the target and for committing the terrorist act. Accused no. 48 and 49 had used another motorcycle during the night and conducted recce of the target as well.
The Bench noted that the mobile phone concealed by Accused no. 44 was recovered as per the disclosure statement of Accused no. 48. “Several documents, notices, magazines etc., were seized from the house of Ameer Ali which inter alia includes the controversial question paper which led to the hand chopping case,” the Court noted.
It was further pointed out that the Accused no. 55 had stayed along with other PFI leaders at a lodge wherein “they assembled for co-ordinating their plan of the murder of Srinivasan. Accused no. 55 took active part in the conspiracy meeting held on along with the assailants.”
Consequently, the Court held, “The appellants are not entitled to be released on bail under Section 43D(5) of the UA (P) Act, in our view.”
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Appeal.
Cause Title: Haneefa & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024:KER:87679)
Appearance:
Appellants: Advocates E.A. Haris, Renjith B. Marar, P.P. Harris
Respondents: Senior Advocate Sasthamangalam S Ajithkumar; Advocate Sreenath Sasidharan
