An impressively analytical order, which is quite rare in a UAPA case.
Books, Slogans, Diary Entries Etc, Not Evidence For UAPA Charges Without Overt Acts Of Violence Or Instigation :NIA Court
livelaw.in/news-updates/b…
Books, Slogans, Diary Entries Etc, Not Evidence For UAPA Charges Without Overt Acts Of Violence Or Instigation :NIA Court
livelaw.in/news-updates/b…
A notable point in the order is that it gave effect to the phrase "further the activities" in Section 38/39 UAPA.
So a mere ideological leaning is not sufficient but there should be at least prima facie evidence to show some overt acts or instigation of violence.
So a mere ideological leaning is not sufficient but there should be at least prima facie evidence to show some overt acts or instigation of violence.
Usually, the Courts ignore this limb of the Sec 38/39, and uncritically accept the theories of the prosecution, which very often blend fierce criticism of the establishment with terrorism. (For eg : Zafoora Sargar, Devangana Kalita cases).
The order draws upon the distinction laid down between passive allegiance and active participation in banned organization.
"A provocative thought does not ipso facto prove preparation for crime", the court said.
"A provocative thought does not ipso facto prove preparation for crime", the court said.
Also, the order had a touch of empathy and human understanding, as the Court indicated that UAPA was a harsh and disproportionate reaction to two young idealistic minds experimenting with extremist revolutionary thoughts out of their anguish at various societal oppressions.
"The strategy to fight against terrorism is to dissuade the disaffected groups from embracing terrorism", the court said.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
