The Delhi High Court has granted bail to two individuals accused in a 2021 anti-terror case, ruling that their detention for nearly five years without any immediate prospect of trial completion justified their release.
A division bench comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja determined in a September 3 order that the protracted pre-trial custody endured by the two accused outweighed the accusations brought against them by the National Investigation Agency. The bench highlighted the slow pace of the proceedings, pointing out that prosecutors had examined only 21 of the 359 witnesses listed in the case.
Protracted Custody Outweighs Allegations
The proceedings stem from an alleged Jammu and Kashmir network investigated under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. Federal investigators claimed the group worked to radicalise local youths through propaganda and recruit them for weapons and explosives training.
Among those granted relief is 33-year-old Sobiya Aziz, who has been in custody since her arrest on October 22, 2021. Investigators alleged that a search of her home yielded an Islamic State flag and personal diaries containing notes advocating Sharia law and militant ideologies.
Aziz’s defence team, comprising advocates Kartik Venu, Arjan Ajai Singh Chonker, Jude Rohit, Agrim Tandon, and Alisha Sharda, argued that she possessed no criminal background and had already been discharged from select charges under the anti-terror law. They submitted that multiple co-accused had already obtained bail and that her presence in a vehicle purportedly carrying weapons was insufficient to prove knowledge of the contraband.
Defence Rebuts Digital Propaganda Claims
The bench also approved bail for Kamran Ashraf Reshi, who was approximately 21 years old when arrested on October 20, 2021. The agency alleged that Reshi maintained contact with handlers in Pakistan, engaged with extremist online forums, attended radicalisation sessions, and possessed a threatening pamphlet.
Countering these assertions, Reshi’s counsel argued that the allegations involved digital communications rather than operational involvement in militant violence. The defence noted that the agency produced no proof showing Reshi authored, circulated, or distributed the single pamphlet seized from his residence, nor did it establish his direct link to specific messaging groups or the dissemination of extremist media.
Strict Travel and Digital Curbs Imposed
Special Public Prosecutor Amit Tiwari, representing the counter-terrorism agency, had opposed bail for both individuals. The prosecution maintained that both accused were involved in a wider conspiracy against the country, asserting that their release could lead to witness intimidation and compromise the trial.
The High Court clarified that its findings were confined strictly to deciding the bail petitions and would have no bearing on the final verdict of the trial.
As part of their release conditions, the court prohibited both individuals from leaving India without trial court clearance, requiring any travel request to include detailed itineraries, durations, purposes, and contact information. The bench further directed them not to join online messaging channels or social platforms where anti-national content is distributed, and strictly barred them from sharing, posting, or circulating such material.
