Haris Nisar Langoo vs National Investigation Agency on 20 March, 2026

March 21, 2026

Delhi High Court

Haris Nisar Langoo vs National Investigation Agency on 20 March, 2026

1. The present criminal appeals have been filed by the appellant(s)
under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008
(hereinafter referred to as the „NIA Act‟) read with Section 43-D(5) of
the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to
as the „UAPA‟), assailing the Order dated 03.03.2023 passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge-03, Special Court (NIA), New
Delhi District, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter referred
to as the „Trial Court‟) in SC Case No. 02/2022, titled NIA v. Tariq
Ahmed Dar & Ors., whereby the learned Trial Court rejected the bail
application(s) filed by the appellant(s) herein.

SPONSORED

2. The appellant(s) before this Court are Zamin Adil Bhat
(Accused No. 14 before the learned Trial Court) in CRL.A. 408/2023,
and Haris Nisar Langoo (Accused No. 15 before the learned Trial
Court) in CRL.A. 406/2023.

3. Before this Court, certain submissions have been advanced
which are common to both the appeals, particularly on the issue of
prolonged incarceration and the plea founded on Article 21 of the
Constitution of India. At the same time, each appeal also raises issues
specific to the concerned appellant; turning on the role attributed to
such appellant; the prosecution material relied upon; and, the findings

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 2 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
recorded by the learned Trial Court. The present judgment, therefore,
first notices the broad factual background of the case and the
prosecution narrative as emerging from the FIR and the charge sheets
filed pursuant thereto.

CASE OF THE PROSECUTION:

4. The case of the prosecution is that reliable information was
received by the Central Government regarding the hatching of a
conspiracy, both in the physical realm and in cyberspace, to carry out
violent terrorist acts in Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) and other parts of
India, including New Delhi. It is alleged that the said conspiracy was
orchestrated by hybrid cadres/sleeper cells of various proscribed
terrorist organisations, such as, Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), Jaish-e-
Mohammad (JeM), Hizb-ul-Mujahideen (HM), Al-Badr, and other
similar outfits, operating through their affiliated front organisations,
including The Resistance Front (TRF), People Against Fascist Forces
(PAFF), Muslim Janbaaz Force (MJF), and Mujahideen Ghazwatul
Hind (MGH).

5. On the basis of the aforementioned intelligence inputs, the
Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, issued Order No.
11011/65/2021/NIA dated 10.10.2021, directing the National
Investigation Agency (NIA) to take over the investigation. Pursuant
thereto, FIR bearing No. RC-29/2021/NIA/DLI (hereinafter referred to
as the „FIR‟) came to be registered at Police Station NIA, Delhi, on
10.10.2021, under Sections 120B, 121A, 122, and 123 of the Indian

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 3 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the „IPC‟), and Sections
18, 18-A, 18-B, 20, 38, and 39 of the UAPA.

6. The FIR, as per the record, apart from naming various
individual accused persons, also narrates a broad conspiracy allegedly
involving Pakistan-based handlers, the Pakistan ISI (intelligence
agency), their local operatives, and networks of Over-Ground Workers
(OGWs) engaged in radicalisation, recruitment, logistical support, and
propaganda activities in furtherance of terrorist objectives.

7. Upon registration of the FIR, an investigation team was
constituted by the NIA, which commenced an inquiry into digital
footprints, call detail records, social media activity, and ground-level
networks allegedly connected with the said conspiracy, as reflected in
the charge sheet and the supplementary charge sheets.

8. During the course of the investigation, searches and raids were
conducted at multiple locations in Jammu and Kashmir, leading to the
detention and subsequent arrest of several suspects, including the
present appellant(s), between 21.10.2021 and 22.10.2021, as recorded
in the arrest and remand documents.

9. Upon completion of a substantial investigation, the NIA filed its
first charge sheet on 08.04.2022 against twenty-six accused persons,
including the present appellant(s). Two accused, namely, the accused
no. 1, Bashir Ahmed Pir @ Imtiyaz Alam, and the accused no. 2,
Imtiyaz Kundoo @ Fayaz Sopore, were shown as absconding.

10. After the filing of the first charge sheet, further investigation
continued, culminating in the filing of a supplementary charge sheet

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 4 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
on 20.03.2023, wherein additional material was placed on record.
However, no distinct or new role was attributed to the appellant(s)
beyond what had already been alleged in the original charge sheet.

11. In the charge sheet, it is alleged that the investigation revealed
that the larger conspiracy was masterminded by the senior leadership
of various terrorist organisations operating from Pakistan. The
conspiracy was allegedly conceived after the revocation of Article 370
of the Constitution of India, with the objective of re-igniting terrorist
activities in Jammu & Kashmir as well as in other parts of India. In
furtherance of this objective, a central coordinating body known as the
“United Jihad Council” (UJC) was allegedly established in
collaboration with other proscribed terrorist organisations. It is further
alleged that the entire operation was orchestrated under the guidance
and support of Pakistan‟s Intelligence Agency, namely, the Inter-
Services Intelligence (ISI). The investigation is stated to have revealed
the formation of various “coordination groups” as an integral
component of the conspiracy, which were tasked with planning and
strategising terrorist operations in the Kashmir Valley.

12. It is alleged that the aforesaid terrorist organisations, in
collaboration with their facilitators and leadership based in Pakistan,
and along with their OGWs operating within India, were actively
engaged in influencing and radicalising vulnerable local youth. The
object of such activities was to recruit and train these individuals for
participation in terrorist acts, including imparting training in the
handling of weapons, ammunition, and explosive substances.

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 5 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10

13. The investigation, as per the charge sheet, further revealed the
alleged existence of newly floated frontal organisations purportedly
created to mask the activities of banned terrorist outfits and to recruit
local youth as OGWs and “hybrid cadres”. It is further alleged that
these coordination groups and hybrid cadres comprised individuals
who were ostensibly engaged in lawful activities but, in reality,
functioned as OGWs, facilitating and executing small-scale terrorist
acts, including targeting civilians and security personnel. These hybrid
cadres were allegedly groomed to carry out low-intensity attacks,
including targeted killings of minorities, political workers, and
security personnel, with the object of spreading fear, unrest, and terror
in the Kashmir Valley and elsewhere, particularly in the aftermath of
the revocation of Article 370 of the Constitution of India.

14. As per the prosecution case, the modus operandi involved the
extensive use of encrypted communication platforms, social media
channels, online propaganda groups, and digital content to radicalise
impressionable youth and to glorify terrorist ideology, fallen militants,
and the concept of violent jihad.

15. It is alleged that Pakistan-based handlers issued directions
through cyberspace to local operatives and OGWs for the
dissemination of propaganda material, identification of potential
recruits, and logistical facilitation of terrorist activities.

16. The prosecution alleges that the appellant(s) were not mere
passive associates but were active participants in both the online and
offline propaganda machinery of the alleged terrorist conspiracy.

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 6 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10

SPECIFIC ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE APPELLANT
NAMELY ZAMIN ADIL BHAT (THE ACCUSED NO. 14):

17. Insofar as the appellant/accused no. 14 is concerned, the
prosecution alleges that he was a highly radicalised individual who
actively propagated videos, images, and audio material related to the
Islamic State (IS) and Islamic State Jammu and Kashmir (ISJK)
among his contacts in order to motivate and radicalize them to join
Jihad for the cause of Kashmir. He used to don the badge of Islamic
State. He also was in contact with several followers of ISJK and used
to receive images with regard to establishment of Wilayat-Al-Hind.
He along with Accused No. 15/Haris Nisar Langoo used to attend
classes of one Bashir Moulvi @ Bashir Chouhan, who used to deliver
radicalizing lectures. He was also a member of several online
propaganda groups run by Pakistan based handlers of proscribed
terrorist organisation on directions of Accused Nos. 1 and 2, that is
Bashir Ahmed Pir @ Imtiyaz Alam and Imityaz Kundoo @ Fayaz
Sopore respectively.

18. According to the prosecution, the appellant also functioned as
an OGW and hybrid cadre for the frontal organisation of proscribed
terrorist organization-TRF, extending logistical and ideological
support to active militants. It is alleged that several incriminating
images in the form of threat posters, clicked images of pasted posters
and audios/videos venerating fallen terrorists have been recovered
from the digital devices seized from the possession of the Accused
Nos. 14 and 15.

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 7 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10

SPECIFIC ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE APPELLANT
NAMELY HARIS NISAR LANGOO (THE ACCUSED NO. 15):

19. With respect to the appellant/accused no. 15, the prosecution
alleges that he was closely associated with the other appellant, namely
Zamin Adil Bhat, and other co-accused, and acted as a facilitator for
the dissemination of radical content through digital platforms.

20. It is specifically alleged that the appellant operated a YouTube
channel titled “No Compromise on Tawheed”, on which lectures of
one Bashir Moulvi @ Bashir Chouhan were uploaded after being
edited to incorporate Islamic State insignia and symbols. The
prosecution asserts that the appellant, in association with the other
appellant, namely Zamin Adil Bhat, used these videos to motivate and
radicalise local youth towards extremist ideology and violent jihad.

21. As per the investigation, the appellant was also involved in
motivating and radicalising local youth and functioned as a staunch
OGW and hybrid cadre for TRF, thereby facilitating terrorist
objectives.

22. The charge sheet records that several incriminating images,
threat posters, screenshots of pasted posters, and audio-visual material
venerating slain terrorists were recovered from the digital devices
seized from the appellant(s).

BAIL APPLICATIONS OF THE APPELLANT(S) BEFORE THE
LEARNED TRIAL COURT AND THE ORDER PASSED
THEREON:

23. Applications for regular bail filed by the appellant(s) were
considered and dismissed by the learned Trial Court by Order dated
03.03.2023.

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 8 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10

24. The learned Trial Court, as reflected in the order on record,
observed that the case pertains to a serious terrorist conspiracy and
that the allegations against the appellant(s), prima facie, attract the
embargo contained in Section 43-D(5) of the UAPA.

25. Aggrieved by the Order dated 03.03.2023 passed by the learned
Trial Court rejecting their bail applications, the present appellant(s)
have approached this Court by way of the present criminal appeals
under Section 21(4) of the NIA, read with Section 43-D(5) of the
UAPA.

26. In the meantime, the learned Trial Court, vide Order dated
30.07.2024, framed charges against the appellant(s) under Sections
120B and 121A of the IPC and Section 18 of the UAPA, while
discharging them of offence under Sections 20, 38, 39 and 40 of
UAPA.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSELS FOR THE
APPELLANT(S):

27. Mr. Jawahar Raja, the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant, namely Mr. Zamin Adil Bhat, and Ms. Tara Narula, the
learned counsel appearing for the appellant, namely Mr. Haris Nisar
Langoo, at the outset, jointly submitted that the delay in the trial
constitutes a ground for the grant of bail to the respective appellant(s).

They submitted that the appellant(s) have been in custody since
21/22.10.2021. As per the charge sheets, the prosecution proposes to
examine approximately 359 witnesses, out of whom only 12 have
been examined thus far. At this pace, they contend, the recording of

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 9 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
evidence alone is likely to take more than 38 years. The appellant(s)
have already undergone custody for more than four years. They
submitted that although the prosecution has stated that the number of
witnesses would be curtailed to 200, with 120 witnesses being formal
in nature, no formal application to that effect has been filed thus far.

28. They further submitted that when the bail applications of the
appellant(s) were earlier rejected, charges were yet to be framed. It is
only by a subsequent Order dated 30.07.2024, that charges have been
framed against the appellant(s) under Sections 120B and 121A of the
IPC and Section 18 of the UAPA Act. They contend that, from the
material placed on record by the prosecution, no offence under any of
the aforesaid provisions is made out against the appellant(s).

29. They further submitted that several co-accused, including
accused no. 13/Mohd. Manan Dar @ Manan, accused no. 10/Mateen
Ahmed Bhatt, and accused no. 16/Rauf Ahmed Bhatt, have been
granted bail, while accused no. 26/Adil Ahmad Ward has been
discharged by the learned Trial Court.

30. They also took us through the statements of the material
witnesses, namely, Mr. Shabir (PW-276), Mr. Tanzeel Yousuf Shah
(PW-285), and protected witnesses X-8 and X-10. Of these, witness
X-8 has already been examined before the learned Trial Court on
30.04.2025, and has not identified the accused no. 14 as being the
person with whom he was in contact. Additionally, with regard to
accused No. 15, the learned counsel referred to X-14, PW-309 (Aadil
Ayoub Sofi), and PW-310 (Muis Ahmad Mir) to submit that the

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 10 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
evidence relied upon by the prosecution fails to demonstrate that the
appellant(s) were either members of a proscribed terrorist organisation
or had any intention to further the activities of such an organisation.
They contended that no overt act has been attributed to the
appellant(s), nor is there any material on record to suggest that they
intended to undertake any violent act. They further submit that the
appellant(s) have been implicated merely because they were members
of certain WhatsApp groups in which objectionable photographs or
videos were shared by other members. However, there are no
allegations that the appellant(s) either created such groups or shared
any objectionable content therein.

31. It was further submitted that vague allegations have been made
describing the appellant(s) as hybrid cadres or „lone wolf operators‟
who allegedly associated themselves with online propaganda groups
floated by various Pakistan-based handlers of proscribed terrorist
organizations at the instance of accused nos. 1 and 2. It is also alleged
that the appellant(s) were followers of one Bashir Moulvi @ Bashir
Chouhan, who purportedly delivered radicalizing lectures that were
thereafter shared by the appellant(s). However, insofar as the appellant
Haris Nisar Langoo (accused no. 15) is concerned, there is no
evidence to substantiate this allegation. As regards the appellant
Zamin Adil Bhat (accused no. 14), the only material relied upon is the
alleged sharing of such content with PW-276, who, according to the
learned counsel, appears to have instigated the appellant into sending
him a video of Bashir Moulvi @ Bashir Chouhan.

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 11 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10

32. It was also submitted that the prosecution has relied upon Call
Detail Records (CDRs) to show that the appellant(s) were in contact
with an alleged TRF commander, namely, Mohd. Abbas Sheikh,
through phone numbers used by accused No. 3, Bilal Ahmad Mir, and
his wife. However, the CDRs merely reflect three calls between
accused no. 14 and accused no. 3 on 23.06.2021, lasting 97 seconds,
49 seconds, and 7 seconds, respectively, between 08:25 P.M. and
08:57 P.M., and five calls between accused no. 15 and accused no. 3,
lasting 35, 9, 7, 21, and 23 seconds, respectively. According to the
learned counsels, apart from being too brief to discuss or hatch any
conspiracy, these calls do not indicate any frequency, pattern, or
continuity suggestive of planning for any unlawful act. They further
submitted that the appellant(s) were working as delivery boys and may
have come into contact with accused no. 3 in connection with such
deliveries.

33. It was also contended that the prosecution has relied upon the
cell location records placing the appellant(s) in the vicinity of accused
no. 3, without considering that the appellant(s) are residents of
Khanyar, District Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir and, therefore, their
presence in the said area is natural. In any event, the mere fact that an
accused/appellant was located within the coverage area of the same
cell tower is insufficient to establish a meeting for the purpose of a
terror conspiracy or support to any terrorist organization.

34. Lastly, it was urged that the mere framing of charges does not
disentitle an accused from being granted bail, particularly when the

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 12 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
conditions stipulated under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA are not
attracted.

35. In support of their respective submissions, the learned counsels
for the appellant(s) have placed reliance on the following judgments:-

i. Kalpnath Rai v. State, (1997) 8 SCC 732.
ii. Suresh Bhudharmal Kalani v. State of Maharashtra, (1998) 7
SCC 337.

iii. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, (2015) 5 SCC 1.
iv. S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram & Ors., (1989) 2 SCC 574.
v. Balwant Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab, 1995 (3) SCC 214.
vi. Bilal Ahmed Kaloo v. State of A.P.,(1997) 7 SCC 431.
vii. Thwaha Fasal v. Union of India, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 1000.
viii. Vernon v. State of Maharashtra & Anr., 2023 SCC OnLine SC
885.
ix. Ranjitsingh Brahmajeetsing Sharma v. State of Maharashtra
& Anr., (2005) 5 SCC 294.

x. Jalaluddin Khan v. Union of India, 2024 INSC 604.
xi. Gurwinder Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr., 2024 SCC
OnLine SC 109.

xii. NIA v. Zahoor Ahmed Shah Watali, (2019) 5 SCC 1.
xiii. Athar Parwez v. Union of India, 2024 INSC 995.
xiv. Yedela Subba Rao & Anr. v. Union of India, (2023) 6 SCC
65.
xv. Hitendra Vishnu Thakur & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra &
Ors., (1994) 4 SCC 602.

xvi. State NCT of Delhi v. Navjyot Sandhu, (2005) 11 SCC 600.
xvii. To issue certain guidelines regarding inadequacies and
deficiencies in Criminal Trials, In re, 2017 SCC OnLine SC
298.

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 13 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
xviii. To issue certain guidelines regarding inadequacies and
deficiencies in Criminal Trials, In re v. State of A.P. Ors.,
(2021) 10 SCC 598.

xix. P. Ponnuswamy v. State of T.N., 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1543.
xx. State (By NCB) Bangaluru v. Pallulabid Ahmad Arimutta
& Anr., (2022) 12 SCC 633.

xxi. Anter Singh v. State of Rajasthan, (2004) 10 SCC 657.

36. Ms.Tara Narula, the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant/Haris Nisar Langoo, further submitted that the appellant is
suffering from cervical spondylosis and that his medical condition has
deteriorated during the prolonged period of incarceration, causing
irreparable harm to his health. It was contended that on this ground
alone, the appellant deserves to be released on bail.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED SENIOR COUNSEL/SPP ON
BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT:

37. On the other hand, Mr. Gautam Narayan, learned Senior
Counsel/SPP appearing for the respondents, submitted that the
appellant(s) have failed to make out a case for grant of bail by
satisfying the conditions stipulated under Section 43D(5) of the
UAPA. He submits that the said provision imposes a statutory bar on
the release of a person accused of offences under Chapter IV and/or
Chapter VI of the UAPA if, upon a perusal of the case diary and the
charge sheet, there are reasonable grounds for believing that the
allegations against such person are prima facie true. Placing reliance
on the judgments of the Supreme Court in Zahoor Ahmad Shah
Watali (supra); Gurwinder Singh (supra); and, Gulfisha Fatima v.

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 14 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10

State (GNCTD), 2026 INSC 2, he submitted that the appellant(s) are
not entitled to be released on bail.

38. He also took us through the material relied upon by the
respondent/prosecution in support of its allegation(s) against the
respective appellant(s). Insofar as the appellant Zamin Adil Bhat
(accused no. 14) is concerned, he specifically relied upon the scrutiny
report of the digital devices seized from the said accused, which
allegedly contained images referring to India as an “occupier”;
material glorifying slain militants associated with TRF, including
messages forwarded by accused no. 14; photographs of accused no. 14
wearing a badge of the Islamic State; and several videos of IS fighters
recovered from his digital devices. He further relied upon the CDR
analysis reports showing calls made by accused no. 14 to accused no.
3 and indicating their close proximity based on cell tower location
data. He also referred to the statements of various witnesses, including
PW-276, PW-285, and protected witnesses X-8 and X-10, insofar as
accused no. 14 is concerned.

39. As regards the appellant Haris Nisar Langoo (accused no. 15),
the learned Senior Counsel/SPP again drew our attention to the
scrutiny report of the digital device seized from him, which, inter alia,
allegedly contained a TRF poster threatening supporters of India;
images exhorting locals to take up jihad; images depicting the Indian
subcontinent as „Ghazwa-e-Hind‟, a term used by IS; images of IS
terrorists; and posters advocating the ideology of IS. He also relied
upon the CDR analysis report to show that accused no. 15 had made

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 15 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
five calls to accused no. 3 and was shown to be in close proximity to
him based on cell tower location data. Additionally, he placed reliance
on the statements of various witnesses earlier referred to by learned
counsel for the appellant(s).

40. He submitted that charges have already been framed against the
appellant(s). He further submitted that, for invoking Section 18 of the
UAPA, it is not necessary for the prosecution to establish the actual
involvement of the appellant(s) in a specific terrorist act under Section
15; even acts such as planning, coordination, or mobilization for a
terrorist act are sufficient to attract Section 18. He contended that the
judgments relied upon by learned counsel for the appellant(s) are not
applicable to the facts of the present case.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS:

41. We have considered the submissions made by the learned
counsels for the parties and have perused the record as well as the
judgments relied upon by the learned counsels for the parties.

42. At the outset, we may deal with the common submission urged
by Mr. Jawahar Raja and Ms. Tara Narula on behalf of the
appellant(s) regarding the delay in trial and the long period of
incarceration of the appellants.

43. At the outset, we would first note that charges have already
been framed against the appellant(s) under Sections 120B and 121A of
the IPC and Section 18 of the UAPA by the learned Trial Court vide
Order dated 30.07.2024. Presently, the said Order has not been
challenged by either party, with accused no. 15 having withdrawn his

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 16 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
challenge on the ground of maintainability. Though Ms. Narula
submits that the appellant is in the process of availing of his right to
challenge the above order, we shall proceed to consider the present
appeals keeping in view the aforesaid Order passed by the learned
Trial Court.

44. The claim for being released on bail during trial, is to be
considered on the anvil of Section 43D of UAPA, which reads as
under:

“43D. Modified application of certain
provisions of the Code. —

xxxxx
(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in the
Code, no person accused of an offence
punishable under Chapters IV and VI of this
Act shall, if in custody, be released on bail or
on his own bond unless the Public Prosecutor
has been given an opportunity of being heard
on the application for such release:

Provided that such accused person shall not
be released on bail or on his own bond if the
Court, on a perusal of the case diary or the
report made under section 173 of the Code is
of the opinion that there are reasonable
grounds for believing that the accusation
against such person is prima facie true.
………………”

45. Most recently, in Gulfisha Fatima (supra), the Supreme Court
considered, inter alia, the statutory framework of Section 43D(5) of
the UAPA and the scope of judicial inquiry at the stage of grant of
bail, and held as under:

“80. From the foregoing discussion, certain
propositions governing the application of
Section 43D(5) emerge with clarity. First, the
provision embodies a deliberate legislative

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 17 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
departure from ordinary bail jurisprudence,
premised upon the distinctive nature of
offences under Chapters IV and VI of the Act.
Second, the expression “prima facie true”

mandates a threshold judicial inquiry which is
neither perfunctory nor adjudicatory,
requiring the Court to examine whether the
prosecution material, taken at face value,
discloses the essential statutory ingredients of
the alleged offence. Third, the inquiry is
necessarily accused- specific, directed to the
role and attribution qua the individual, and
does not admit of collective or undifferentiated
treatment merely because allegations arise
from a common transaction or conspiracy.

Fourth, the bail stage under Section 43D(5) is
not a forum for evaluating defences, weighing
evidence, or conducting a mini- trial; judicial
restraint at this stage is not an abdication of
duty but a fulfilment of the statutory mandate.

These propositions, read together, define the
contours of judicial power and responsibility
under the provision.

81. The correct application of Section 43D(5),
therefore, requires the Court to undertake a
structured inquiry confined to the following:

i. whether the prosecution material,
accepted as it stands, discloses a prima
facie case satisfying the statutory
ingredients of the offence alleged;

ii. whether the role attributed to the
accused reflects a real and meaningful
nexus to the unlawful activity or terrorist
activity proscribed under the Act, as
distinguished from mere association or
peripheral presence; and
iii. whether the statutory threshold is
crossed qua the individual accused,
without embarking upon an assessment
reserved after full- fledged trial.

82. Where these requirements are met, the
statutory restraint on the grant of bail must
operate with full force; where they are not, the
embargo stands lifted. This approach

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 18 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
preserves the legislative purpose of the Act,
and ensures that the exceptional nature of the
bail regime under Section 43D(5) is neither
diluted by overreach nor distorted by
mechanical application.”

46. The Court, while further analysing Sections 15 and 18 of the
UAPA for the consideration of an application under Section 43D(5) of
the UAPA, held as under:

“90. Read together, Sections 15 and 18
disclose a legislative design wherein Section
15 defines the nature of acts which Parliament
has characterised as terrorist acts, while
Section 18 ensures that criminal liability is not
confined only to the final execution, but
extends to those who contribute to the
commission of such acts through planning,
coordination, mobilisation, or other forms of
concerted action. Whether particular conduct
ultimately attracts Section 15 directly, or
Section 18 read with Section 15, depends upon
the role attributed and the statutory
ingredients alleged to be satisfied.

91. At the stage of consideration under Section
43D(5), the Court is not required to finally
classify the conduct or determine the precise
provision under which liability would
ultimately arise. The inquiry is confined to
whether, on the prosecution material taken at
face value, there are reasonable grounds for
believing that the accused’s conduct bears a
prima facie nexus to a terrorist act as defined
under the Act, whether as a direct participant
or as a conspirator or facilitator.”

47. On the question of delay in trial and its effect on an application
filed by the accused seeking bail, the Supreme Court explained that
Article 21 provides not an absolute but a correlated right. All accused

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 19 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
are not to be treated identically; their respective roles in the alleged
conspiracy must be considered. It must be examined what role is
ascribed to them by the prosecution, how the same fits within the
statutory ingredients, and whether continued detention would serve a
legitimate purpose recognised by law. We quote from the judgment as
under:

“101. It is well recognised that Article 21
rights, though not absolute, require the State
and the Court to justify continued custody with
reference to the specific individual before it.
Treating all accused identically irrespective of
their roles would risk transforming pre-trial
detention into a punitive mechanism divorced
from individual circumstances. The
constitutional mandate demands a
differentiated inquiry: where prolonged
custody disproportionately burdens those
whose roles are limited, the balance between
individual liberty and collective security may
call for conditional release, while the same
balance may tilt differently for those alleged to
have orchestrated the offence.

102. The statutory restrictions under special
enactments do not preclude the Court from
recognising distinctions between accused
persons based on the quality of material, the
nature of involvement, and the necessity of
further detention.

103. At this stage, the Court must be careful
not to confuse two distinct legal exercises. One
is the determination of criminal liability,
which belongs to trial. The other is the
regulation of personal liberty pending trial,

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 20 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
which is the limited concern of bail. The law of
conspiracy explains how several persons,
acting at different levels and at different points
of time, may be bound together by a common
design. That doctrine answers the question of
liability. It does not answer, by itself, the
separate question of how long and on what
basis the liberty of each individual may be
restrained before guilt is proved. Bail
adjudication therefore necessarily proceeds on
a different plane. It requires the Court to look
at what is attributed to each accused, how that
attribution fits within the statutory ingredients,
and whether continued detention, at that stage,
serves a legitimate purpose recognised by law.
This exercise does not dismantle the
prosecution case of conspiracy, nor does it
rank culpability. It merely ensures that pre-
trial detention does not become indiscriminate
or automatic, and that statutory restraint
operates with reason, proportion, and fidelity
to individual attribution. Seen thus,
differentiation is not an exception to
conspiracy law, but a constitutional discipline
imposed upon the exercise of bail
jurisdiction.”

48. Keeping in view the above parameters, we shall now consider
the allegations of the prosecution against the appellant(s) and
juxtapose the same with the period of incarceration they have already
undergone and are likely to undergo further in case they are not
released on bail.

49. In the present appeals, as would be evident from the charge
sheet, the order on charge, and the submissions of the learned senior
counsel appearing for the respondents, the allegations against the

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 21 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
appellant(s) are that they were part of social media groups where anti-
national messages propagating terrorism were being shared. However,
there is no allegation of the appellant(s) being the creators of these
groups or of sharing any objectionable material therein.

50. There are also allegations that the appellant(s) were OGWs who
were instigating youth to join terrorism by sharing videos, including
videos of slain IS terrorists, in respect of which statements of various
witnesses have been relied upon. The learned counsel for accused no.
14 has also taken us through the WhatsApp messages exchanged
between accused no. 14 and PW-276, which would prima facie show
that it was PW-276 who was instigating accused no. 14 to share the
videos and images, a matter that shall fall for deeper consideration at
trial.

51. There is also material indicating that the appellant(s) were in
touch with accused no. 3, as reflected in the CDR analysis. However,
the calls between accused no. 14 and accused no. 3 were only three in
number, lasting 97, 49, and 7 seconds respectively, while accused no.
15 made five calls to accused no. 3, lasting 35, 9, 7, 21, and 23
seconds respectively. The learned counsels for the appellants have
urged that the short duration of the calls are insufficient to establish
any shared criminal purpose or conspiratorial nexus. It has been urged
that the appellant(s), being delivery boys by occupation, may
plausibly have come in contact with accused no. 3 in connection with
such deliveries, and the prosecution has not placed any material on
record to conclusively rule out such an innocent explanation. The plea

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 22 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
of the learned counsels for the appellants would again have to be
tested in trial, however, for the purpose of the present appeal, cannot
be completely brushed aside as being fanciful or absolutely
improbable.

52. Similarly, the prosecution has relied upon cell tower location
data to show the proximity of the appellant(s) to accused no. 3.
However, the appellant(s) are residents of Khanyar, District Srinagar,
and their presence in the said area is claimed to be natural. In any
event, mere presence within the range of the same cell tower is by
itself insufficient to establish a meeting for the purpose of a terror
conspiracy. The consideration of this evidence along with other pieces
of evidence that may unearth in the course of the trial, is a matter to be
considered by the learned Trial Court. For the purposes of the present
appeal, suffice it is to say that the appellants, given their long period
of incarceration and the role attributed to them by the prosecution,
have been able to meet the test laid down by the Supreme Court in
Gulfisha Fatima (supra) for being released on bail.

53. As regards the material found on the digital devices of the
appellants, which may even be propagating anti-national activities, in
our view, the same may not justify the continuation of the prolonged
detention of the appellants at the trial stage. It is not the case of the
prosecution that the appellants are the creators of this content or had
further disseminated this content to others. We are guided by the
observations of the Supreme Court in Thwaha Fasal (supra), wherein
the Supreme Court, while dealing with UAPA bail matters, held that

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 23 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
sympathy for a cause, or even the possession of literature and digital
content associated with a banned organization, does not by itself
constitute membership of such organisation or active participation in
its terrorist activities, absent a demonstrated nexus to actual terrorist
acts. The distinction between ideological alignment and operational
participation is constitutionally significant, and must be borne in mind
while applying the prima facie standard under Section 43D(5) of the
UAPA to the specific facts and material attributed to each of the
appellant(s). In this regard, we may usefully draw support from the
judgment of the Supreme Court in Vernon (supra).

54. Most significantly, witness X-8, who was one of the key
prosecution witnesses relied upon to establish the role of accused
no.14 (Zamin Adil Bhat) in radicalising and instigating youth towards
terrorism through the sharing of videos and extremist content, upon
examination before the learned Trial Court on 30.04.2025, did not
identify accused no. 14 as the person who shared such material with
him or instigated him. While this Court is not conducting a mini-trial
and the weight of this evidence remains a matter for the learned Trial
Court to assess finally, it is nonetheless a relevant factor in the present
inquiry, particularly as mandated by Section 43D(5) of the UAPA and
as expounded in Gulfisha Fatima (supra).

55. We must also remain mindful of the fact that though it has been
submitted by the learned Senior Counsel for the respondents that,
pursuant to certain orders passed by the Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.)
No. 83/2024, titled Suhail Ahmad Thokar v. National Investigation

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 24 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
Agency, the list of witnesses to be examined at trial has been curtailed
and, therefore, the trial is not likely to take long, in our view, even
with the curtailed number of witnesses, the trial is still likely to take a
considerable amount of time to conclude. We, therefore, are of the
view that taking into consideration the allegations against the
appellant(s), their continued detention may amount to a violation of
their right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The
appellant(s) have already undergone prolonged incarceration of
around 4 years and 4 months, without any certainty of the trial
concluding within a reasonable time. In our considered opinion, and
keeping in view the role assigned to the appellant(s), the continued
detention of the appellant(s) at this stage would not serve the ends of
justice.

56. Insofar as the health condition of appellant/Haris Nisar Langoo
(accused no. 15) is concerned, it has been brought on record that he is
suffering from cervical spondylosis, a condition that has reportedly
deteriorated during the period of his incarceration. While this Court
does not treat medical grounds as independently decisive in cases
governed by Section 43D(5) of the UAPA, the state of health of an
undertrial prisoner is nonetheless a relevant consideration in the
overall assessment of rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of
India. Prolonged pre-trial detention of a person whose alleged role is
predominantly digital and non-violent in nature, and who is
additionally suffering from a documented ailment, further tilts the

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 25 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
balance in favour of conditional release rather than continued
incarceration.

57. We are also influenced by the fact that certain co-accused, that
is accused no. 13 (Mohd. Manan Dar @ Manan), accused no. 10
(Mateen Ahmed Bhatt), and accused no. 16 (Rauf Ahmed Bhatt),
having similar allegations against them, have been granted bail by the
learned Special Court itself, while accused no. 26 (Adil Ahmad Ward)
has been discharged altogether.

58. While having found and said the above, this Court is conscious
that the grant of bail in matters under the UAPA must be accompanied
by stringent and carefully crafted conditions, so as to ensure that the
legitimate interests of national security and the integrity of the trial
process are not compromised. The conditions imposed hereinbelow
are therefore calibrated to address these concerns, while also ensuring
that the appellant(s) are not subjected to pre-trial detention that has
effectively become punitive given the projected duration of trial and
the limited role attributed to them in the charge sheet.

59. Keeping in view the above, the Impugned Order is hereby set
aside.

60. The appellant(s) are directed to be released on bail, subject to
their furnishing personal bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties
of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, and
subject to the following conditions:-

i. The appellant(s) shall not travel out of the country

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 26 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
without the prior permission of the learned Trial Court.
ii. The appellant(s) shall surrender their passports, if any,
before the learned Trial Court. In case they do not hold a
passport, an affidavit to that effect shall be filed;
iii. The appellant(s) shall furnish their current residential
addresses, contact numbers, and e-mail addresses to the
Investigating Officer as well as to the learned Trial Court. They
shall use only one mobile phone and/or one landline number
during the course of trial. Details of these numbers shall be
provided to the Special Public Prosecutor, and the mobile phone
shall always be kept in the switched-on mode. They shall not
change their place of residence or contact particulars without
giving at least seven days‟ prior written intimation to the
Investigating Officer and the learned Trial Court;
iv. The appellants shall personally appear on every Monday
between 10:00 A.M. and 12:00 Noon, before the Station House
Officer, Local Police Station, and mark their attendance. The
Station House Officer shall maintain a separate register of
attendance in respect of each of these appellant(s) and shall
furnish a monthly compliance report to the learned Trial Court,
which shall be placed on the main record of the case;
v. The appellant(s) shall not directly or indirectly contact,
influence, intimidate, or attempt to contact any witness or any
person connected with the proceedings, nor shall they associate
with or participate in the activities of any group or organization

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 27 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10
linked to the subject matter of the present FIR/final report;
vi. The appellant(s) shall not join any WhatsApp group or
other social media platforms where anti-national material is
uploaded or circulated or propagated. They shall themselves also
not upload/share/disseminate or circulate any anti-national
material on any social media platform or otherwise. They shall
also furnish an undertaking to this effect before the learned Trial
Court;

vii. The appellant(s) shall fully cooperate with the trial and
shall appear on every date of hearing before the learned Trial
Court unless exempted by the learned Trial Court, and they shall
not exhibit any conduct that has the effect of delaying the
proceedings; and,
viii. The appellant(s) shall not make any comment in the
media about the present case or their role in the case.

61. In the event of the appellant(s) violating any of the conditions
mentioned above, the prosecution will be at liberty to seek
cancellation of bail granted to the appellant(s).

62. It is made clear that the observations made herein shall not be
construed as an expression on the merits of the case, and the same
have been made only for the purpose of consideration of bail.

63. A copy of this order be sent to the learned Trial Court as also
the concerned Jail Superintendent for information and necessary
compliance.

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 28 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10

64. The appeals along with the pending applications are disposed of
in the above terms.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J
MARCH 20, 2026/rv/DG

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CRL.A. 406/2023 & CRL.A. 408/2023 Page 29 of 29
By:REYMON VASHIST
Signing Date:20.03.2026
12:48:10

Source link

Welcome to Airr News

Welcome to Airr News

Forever

Recommended

1-Year

1-Month

Welcome to Airr News

Forever

Recommended

1-Year

1-Month

Welcome to Airr News

Haris Nisar Langoo vs National Investigation Agency on 20 March, 2026

Delhi High Court