Mohd. Saquib Ansari vs State Nct Of Delhi on 27 July, 2026

    0
    7
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Supreme Court – Daily Orders

    Mohd. Saquib Ansari vs State Nct Of Delhi on 27 July, 2026

    Author: Vikram Nath

    Bench: Vikram Nath

                             ITEM NO.4           COURT NO.2        SECTION II-D
    
                                    S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
                                              RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
    
                             Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
                                                            No(s). 11369/2026
    
                             [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order
                             dated 24-04-2026 in CRLA No. 0095/2025 passed by
                             the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi]
    
                             MOHD. SAQUIB ANSARI                PETITIONER(S)
    
                                                    VERSUS
    
                             STATE NCT OF DELHI                 RESPONDENT(S)
                             IA No. 179981/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF
                             THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
                             IA No. 179980/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
    
                             WITH
    
                             SLP(Crl) No. 11414/2026 (II-D)
                             IA No. 180493/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF
                             THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
                             IA No. 180491/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
    
                             Date : 27-07-2026    These matters were called
                                                  on for hearing today.
    
                             CORAM :
                                       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH
                                       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
    
                             For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Trideep Pais, Sr. Adv.
                                                Ms. Deeksha Dwivedi, Adv.
                                                Ms. Sakshi Jain, Adv.
    Signature Not Verified
    
    Digitally signed by
    NEETU KHAJURIA
    Date: 2026.07.28
    
                                                                                  1
    17:28:04 IST
    Reason:
                           Ms. Saloni Ambasta, Adv.
                           Mr. Fahad M. Khan, Adv.
                           Mr. Nilesh Jain, Adv.
                           Mr. Paras Nath Singh, AOR
    
    For Respondent(s) :Mr. Anil Kaushik, A.S.G.
                       Mr. Shreekant Neelappa Terdal, AOR
                       Mr. Pranjal Singh, Adv.
                       Ms. Alka Aggarwal, Adv.
                       Mr. Rajan Kumar Chourasia, Adv.
                       Mr. Kartikay Asthana, Adv.
    
                       UPON hearing the counsel
                 the Court made the following
                                   O R D E R
    

    1. The petitioners are in custody in
    connection with FIR No. 54 of 2011 dated
    22nd November, 2011 registered at Police
    Station Special Cell, New Delhi for the
    offences punishable under Sections 471,
    489B, 489C, and 120B of the Indian Penal
    Code, 1860; Section 25 of the Arms Act,
    1959; Sections 17, 18, 18A, 18B, 19 and 20
    of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention)
    Act, 1967; Sections 3, 4, and 5 of
    Explosive Substances Act, 1908; and
    Section 12 of the Passports Act, 1967.

    2. The respective applications for bail
    preferred by the petitioners under Section

    SPONSORED

    SLP(Crl)No(s). 11369/2026
    2
    43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities
    (Prevention) Act, 1967
    came to be rejected
    by the learned trial Court. The appeals
    preferred thereagainst under Section 21 of
    the National Investigation Agency Act,
    2008, questioning the orders passed by the
    learned trial Court were dismissed by the
    High Court of Delhi by a common judgment
    and order dated 24th April, 2026. Aggrieved
    thereby, the petitioners have approached
    this Court by way of the present Special
    Leave Petitions.

    3. We have heard and considered the
    submissions advanced by learned counsel
    for the petitioners, and Mr. Anil Kaushik,
    learned Additional Solicitor General
    appearing for the State (NCT of Delhi) and
    have perused the record.

    4. The Special Cell, during the course of
    investigation in the said FIR, arrested a
    Pakistani national, Mohd. Qateel Siddiqui,
    on the intervening night of 21st/22nd
    November, 2011. During the course of

    SLP(Crl)No(s). 11369/2026
    3
    investigation, the said Mohd. Qateel
    Siddiqui allegedly made disclosures
    regarding the establishment of a Rajasthan
    Module of the Indian Mujahideen to carry
    out terrorist activities in and around
    Delhi and further disclosed that its
    members were in possession of consignments
    of explosives.

    5. Pursuant to the said information, the
    premises of the petitioner-Mohd. Saquib
    Ansari at Jodhpur were searched on 23rd
    March, 2014, during which gunpowder,
    ammonium nitrate, detonators and other
    articles allegedly used for the
    preparation of explosive devices were
    recovered and seized. These articles were
    handed over to the Rajasthan ATS,
    consequent to which, a separate case being
    FIR No. 113/2014 came to be registered at
    PS Pratap Nagar, Jodhpur, for the offences
    punishable under Sections 4, 5 and 6 of
    the Explosive Substances Act, 1908;
    Sections 16, 17, 18, 18A, 18B, 19, 20, 23

    SLP(Crl)No(s). 11369/2026
    4
    and 38 of the Unlawful Activities
    (Prevention) Act, 1967
    ; and Sections 120B,
    121, 121A, 122, 212, 465, 468 and 471 of
    the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

    6. Likewise, explosives and IED-making
    materials were recovered from the
    possession of co-accused Waqar Azhar
    [petitioner in SLP (Crl.) No.11414 of
    2026] at Jaipur.

    7. The recovered articles were handed
    over to the Rajasthan ATS/SOG, leading to
    the registration of FIR No. 03/2014 at
    Police Station CID/SOG, Jaipur, initially
    for the offences punishable under Sections
    4
    and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act,
    1908; Sections 3, 10, 13, 16, 18 and 20 of
    the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act,
    1967 read with Section 120B of the Indian
    Penal Code, 1860.

    8. The petitioners were formally arrested
    in connection with all the three FIRs
    during the year 2014 itself and have
    remained in custody ever since. They have

    SLP(Crl)No(s). 11369/2026
    5
    been granted bail in connection with the
    cases registered at Rajasthan as per
    details given below.

    9. In the case arising out of FIR No. 03

    of 2014 registered at Police Station
    CID/SOG, Jaipur, both the petitioners came
    to be convicted by the learned trial Court
    vide judgment dated 30th March, 2021 for
    various offences punishable under the
    provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860,
    the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and the
    Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act,
    1967
    . Upon conviction, the learned trial
    Court awarded different terms of
    substantive imprisonment for the
    respective offences, including rigorous
    imprisonment for ten years under various
    provisions of the Explosive Substances
    Act, 1908
    and the Unlawful Activities
    (Prevention) Act, 1967
    , as also under
    Sections 121A and 122 of the Indian Penal
    Code, 1860. The maximum sentence imposed
    upon the petitioners was imprisonment for

    SLP(Crl)No(s). 11369/2026
    6
    life for the offence punishable under
    Section 121 of the Indian Penal Code,
    1860.

    10. The sentence awarded to the
    petitioner-Mohd. Saquib Ansari has,
    however, been suspended by the High Court
    of Rajasthan vide order dated 6th
    September, 2024.

    11. The trial arising out of FIR
    No.113/2014 registered at PS Pratap Nagar,
    Jodhpur is still pending. However, the
    petitioner-Mohd. Saquib Ansari has been
    granted bail in the said case by the High
    Court of Rajasthan vide order dated 7th
    November, 2024.

    12. Likewise, the sentence awarded to
    petitioner-Waqar Azhar in FIR No.03/2014
    has also been suspended by the High Court
    of Rajasthan, and he has also been granted
    bail in FIR No.113/2014.

    13. Both the petitioners herein continue
    to remain incarcerated in connection with
    FIR No.54 of 2011 registered at Police

    SLP(Crl)No(s). 11369/2026
    7
    Station Special Cell, New Delhi for the
    last nearly 12 years with no prospect of
    an early conclusion of the trial.

    14. One of the co-accused, namely, Mohd.
    Maroof, who is also facing trial with the
    petitioners in the present case, has
    already been enlarged on bail.

    15. Having appreciated the submissions
    advanced at bar, and upon going through
    the record, we find that the petitioners
    have, more or less, been implicated in
    three separate FIRs for overlapping
    allegations.

    16. In FIR No. 03/2014 registered at
    Police Station CID/SOG, Jaipur, both the
    petitioners were convicted, and their
    sentences have since been suspended by the
    High Court. Both the petitioners have also
    been granted bail in connection with FIR
    No.113/2014 registered at PS Pratap Nagar,
    Jodhpur. Consequently, the continued
    incarceration of the petitioners is solely
    on account of FIR No. 54/2011 registered

    SLP(Crl)No(s). 11369/2026
    8
    at PS Special Cell, New Delhi. We have
    checked the status of the trial from the
    proceedings available on the e-Courts
    Services Portal. An application for bail
    preferred by co-accused Mohd. Kafeel came
    to be rejected by the learned trial Court
    vide order dated 20th July, 2026, wherein
    it has been noticed that the examination
    of PW-68 was continuing out of the 197
    prosecution witnesses proposed to be
    examined. The proceedings further reveal
    that from January, 2025 till date, only
    two witnesses have been examined, one of
    whom has been examined only in part. The
    progress of the trial has been extremely
    slow, and there appears to be no prospect
    of the trial being concluded in the near
    future.

    17. As per the counter-affidavit of the
    respondents, as many as 25 accused have
    been arrested in the present case. Having
    regard to the overall facts and
    circumstances, particularly the fact that

    SLP(Crl)No(s). 11369/2026
    9
    the co-accused Mohd. Maroof has already
    been enlarged on bail; that the sentences
    of both the petitioners have been
    suspended in the case arising from FIR No.
    03/2014 registered at PS CID/SOG, Jaipur
    wherein they were convicted by the special
    Court at Rajasthan; that the petitioners
    have been granted bail in connection with
    the FIR No.113/2014 registered at PS
    Pratap Nagar, Jodhpur; coupled with the
    slow progress of trial, we feel that the
    continued incarceration of the petitioners
    in this case is grossly violative of the
    right to liberty enshrined under Article
    21
    of the Constitution of India.

    18. Accordingly, we direct that the
    petitioners be released on bail, on such
    terms and conditions as may be imposed by
    the trial Court, in connection with FIR
    No.54 of 2011 dated 22nd November, 2011
    registered at PS Special Cell, New Delhi,
    subject to their not being required in any
    other case.

    SLP(Crl)No(s). 11369/2026
    10

    19. It is made clear that the observations
    made herein are confined to the
    adjudication of the present petitions
    seeking bail and shall not be construed as
    an expression on the merits of the case
    pending before the trial Court.

    20. The petitioners shall continue to
    cooperate with the trial. In the event the
    trial Court or the prosecution finds that
    the petitioners are delaying the
    conclusion of trial, failing to cooperate
    with the trial, or otherwise misusing the
    liberty granted to them, it shall be open
    to the prosecution to apprise this Court
    of the same for appropriate orders.

    21. The Special Leave Petitions and
    pending applications are disposed of
    accordingly.

    (NEETU KHAJURIA) (RANJANA SHAILEY)
    ASTT.REGISTRAR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

    SLP(Crl)No(s). 11369/2026
    11



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here