The Kerala High Court held that the mere act of gold smuggling is not a ‘Terrorist Act’ unless done with the intention to threaten economic security.
The batch of criminal appeals was filed against the orders passed by the Judge presiding over the Special Court for the trial of NIA Cases, Ernakulam on applications for bail submitted by various accused alleged of offenses punishable under Sections 16, 17, and 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UA(P) Act).
It has been seen that two common orders are passed by the Judge of the Special Court. Bail was granted to various accused.
The department represented by the National Investigation Agency, Kochi (NIA) challenged the orders granting the bail to the accused alleged offenses punishable under Sections 16, 17, and 18 of the UA(P) Act.
Common grounds taken in the appeals filed by NIA are that the court below ought to have seen that the facts in the case, viewed in the background of Sections 15 and 43D of the UA(P) Act, did not justify the grant of bail in favor of the accused, that the court below failed to consider the overall effect of the materials gathered by the prosecution and made available before the court indicating a prima facie case against the accused and that the court below should have considered the peculiar nature of the offense, wherein numerous persons are involved, requiring a time-consuming investigation deep into the matter to bring out true facts.
The counsels appearing for the accused contended that despite consuming much time, the investigating agency could not find out any reason justifying further detention of the accused persons. It is also contended that Section 15 of the UA(P) Act is totally inapplicable to the facts of this case.
A division bench comprising Justices A Hariprasad and MR Anitha while dismissing the appeals filed by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) an order of the Special NIA Court at Kochi granting bail to ten persons who were accused in the diplomatic channel gold smuggling case, held that mere act of gold smuggling, which is covered under the Customs Act, will not amount to a “terrorist act” under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act unless the same is done with the intention to threaten the economic security of the nation.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. We welcome your comments at info@taxscan.in
