In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court on Thursday upheld the constitutional validity of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), dismissing a plea that challenged the law as ultra vires and violative of fundamental rights.
A division bench comprising Justices A.S. Gadkari and Neela Gokhale ruled that the UAPA, in its current form, is “constitutionally valid,” thereby rejecting the arguments raised by the petitioner, Anil Baburao Baile, who is facing investigation in the Elgaar Parishad case.
The petition, filed in 2021, also sought to challenge the now-suspended Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with the offence of sedition. Baile had urged the court to declare both laws unconstitutional and to quash the July 10, 2020 notice issued to him by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) under UAPA provisions.
Arguing before the court, Baile claimed that the UAPA granted “unbridled power” to the executive to designate individuals or organisations as “unlawful” or “terrorist” without adequate legal safeguards or clear definitions. He further contended that the 2019 amendment to the UAPA, which incorporated provisions from a 2001 United Nations Security Council resolution on terrorism, allowed the government to arbitrarily brand Indian citizens as terrorists without judicial oversight.
The plea maintained that neither the Constitution nor the Parliament could authorize the executive with such sweeping powers without violating constitutional guarantees such as the right to equality and freedom of speech.
However, the High Court rejected these contentions, stating that the Act does not suffer from any constitutional infirmities and conforms to the broader objectives of national security and public order.
With this ruling, the Bombay High Court joins a line of decisions that have upheld the UAPA’s validity amidst growing national and international scrutiny over its impact on civil liberties.
