Supreme Court Grants Bail to Two Accused in Terror Case, Cites Violation of Right to Liberty

The Supreme Court has granted bail to two alleged Indian Mujahideen operatives who had been in custody since 2014, observing that their continued incarceration was 'grossly violative' of the right to liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta noted that the petitioners, Mohd Saquib Ansari and Waqar Azhar, were incarcerated for nearly 12 years in connection with a terror case lodged in Delhi, with no prospect of an early conclusion of the trial. '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,' the Bench said in its July 27 order. It also noted that one of the co-accused had already been granted bail.

The top court passed the order on separate pleas filed by Ansari and Azhar challenging an April order of the Delhi High Court that had refused to grant them bail in the case registered by the Special Cell of Delhi Police in November 2011. '...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,' the Bench said.

It noted that the petitioners were arrested in connection with three FIRs, including two registered in Rajasthan, in 2014 and had remained in custody ever since. The Bench said that in one of the cases lodged in Rajasthan, both petitioners were convicted by a trial court in March 2021, and subsequently, the sentence awarded to them was suspended by the High Court. Trial in another case registered against them in Rajasthan was pending, and both petitioners had already been granted bail in that case.

'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,' the Bench said. It directed that the petitioners be released on bail on such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the trial court in connection with the FIR registered in Delhi, subject to them not being required in any other case. The Bench said the petitioners would continue to cooperate with the trial.

It added that if the trial court or prosecution finds that they are delaying the conclusion of trial, failing to cooperate, or otherwise misusing the liberty granted, the prosecution could apprise the Supreme Court for appropriate orders. The Bench made clear that observations were confined to the bail petitions and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. On June 17, the Supreme Court had sought a response from Delhi Police on the bail pleas of the two accused.

The case originated when an alleged Indian Mujahideen member, Mohd Quateel Siddiqui, was apprehended in November 2011, and he purportedly made disclosures regarding the establishment of a Rajasthan module of the outfit to carry out terror activities in and around Delhi. Based on the disclosures and information received, the Special Cell arrested several individuals and seized a large quantity of explosives and ammunition.