The Bombay HC upholds bail given to Areeb Majeed, a Kalyan resident facing UAPA charges for travelling to Iraq and Syria to join ISIS. Bail upheld as the accused had been incarcerated for more than six years as an undertrial. Majeed argued his case in person.
HC: We have observed that Majeed is an educated person, who was completing his graduation in Civil Engineering when he left for Iraq at the age of 21 years. He categorically stated before us that as a 21-year-old, he was carried away and that he had committed a serious mistake,
.....for which he had already spent more than six years behind bars. In the past more than six years of his incarceration, Majeed has argued his case on his own before the NIA Court.
HC: He represented his own case before this Court as well as the NIA Court and we could find that he was presenting his case by maintaining decorum and in a proper manner.
HC: During the course of hearing, it transpired that his father is a doctor of Unani medicine and his sisters are also
doctors. His brother is an engineer.
HC: This shows that he comes from an educated family and that if stringent conditions are imposed upon him, with an undertaking to cooperate with the trial proceedings before the NIA Court, his release on bail may not be harmful to the society at large ....
...and it would not adversely affect the trial proceedings before the NIA Court.
It was the case of the NIA that Majeed along with three absconding accused persons had visited Iraq "ostensibly" for pilgrimage along with other persons, who were on pilgrimage but, the accused persons including Majeed never visited the sites of pilgrimage...
....and, instead, escaped into Iraq and Syria with the intention of indulging in "jihadi activities" by joining Islamic State for Iraq and Levant (ISIL). According to the NIA, the said accused persons including Majeed formed an unlawful association with an intention to promote..
...terrorism in Iraq, Syria and India. They also participated in terrorist activities in Syria and Iraq and they were likely to commit such acts in India also.
The respondent had allegedly returned to India with the intention of carrying out such terrorist acts in India, including blowing up the Police Headquarter at Mumbai.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Allahabad HC rejects the anticipatory bail plea of Aparna Purohit. Says western filmmakers have refrained from ridiculing Lord Jesus or the Prophet but hindi filmmakers have done this repeatedly and still doing this most unabashedly with the Hindu Gods and Goddesses.
Allahabad HC: This Court further takes notice of the fact that a number of movies have been produced which have used the name of Hindu Gods and Goddesses and shown them in a disrespectful manner (Ram Teri Ganga Maili, Satyam Shivam Sundram, P.K., Oh My God, etc.).
Allahabad HC: Not only this, efforts have been made to subvert the image of historical and mythological personalities (Padmavati). Names and icons of faith of majority community have been used to earn money (Goliyon Ki Rasleela Ram Leela).
Centre opposes petitions seeking recogisation of same-sex marriages. Says the acceptance of the institution of marriage between two individuals of the same gender is neither recognized nor accepted in any uncodified personal laws or any codified statutory laws.
Centre: Constitutional court can analyze the existing rights but cannot create a new right by the process of judicial adjudication.
Centre: Article 21 cannot be expanded to extend to include the fundamental right for a same-sex marriage to be recognised under the laws of the country which in fact mandate the contrary.
"Considering the scanty&sketchy evidence available on record, I do not find any palpable reasons to breach the general rule of Bail against a 22 years old young lady, with absolutely blemish-free criminal antecedents..", says ASJ Dharmender Rana while giving bail to #DishaRavi.
Judge Rana: In my considered opinion creation of a WhatsApp group or being editor of an innocuous Toolkit is not an offence.
ASJ Rana: Further, since the link with the said toolkit or PJF has not been found to be objectionable, mere deletion of the WhatsApp chat to destroy the evidence linking her with
the toolkit and PJF also becomes meaningless.
A three-judge bench comprising Justices D Y Chandrachud, Indu Malhotra and K M Joseph to commence hearing at 12 noon, a plea seeking a ban on the #SudarshanTV's show on the so-called “infiltration of Muslims” in the Civil Services.
The Court on Sep 15 had restrained #SudarshanTV from broadcasting the remaining episodes of its show, till further orders.
"An insidious attempt has been made to insinuate that the community is involved in a conspiracy to infiltrate the civil services", the Court had noted.
Details of the stand of the Central Government and the Sudarshan TV can be read here 👇