"Party Autonomy is the Backbone of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Upholds Sole Arbitrator Appointment Despite Party’s Attempts to Frustrate Arbitration Proceedings    |     Reasonable Doubt Arising from Sole Testimony in Absence of Corroboration, Power Cut Compounded Identification Difficulties: Supreme Court Acquits Appellants in Murder Case    |     ED Can Investigate Without FIRs: PH High Court Affirms PMLA’s Broad Powers    |     Accident Claim | Contributory Negligence Cannot Be Vicariously Attributed to Passengers: Supreme Court    |     Default Bail | Indefeasible Right to Bail Prevails: Allahabad High Court Faults Special Judge for Delayed Extension of Investigation    |     “Habitual Offenders Cannot Satisfy Bail Conditions Under NDPS Act”: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to Accused with Extensive Criminal Record    |     Delhi High Court Denies Substitution for Son Due to 'Gross Unexplained Delay' of Over Six Years in Trademark Suit    |     Section 4B of the Tenancy Act Cannot Override Land Exemptions for Public Development: Bombay High Court    |     Suspicion, However High, Is Not a Substitute for Proof: Calcutta High Court Orders Reinstatement of Coast Guard Officer Dismissed on Suspicion of Forgery    |     Age Not Conclusively Proven, Prosecutrix Found to be a Consenting Party: Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Accused in POCSO Case    |     'Company's Absence in Prosecution Renders Case Void': Himachal High Court Quashes Complaint Against Pharma Directors    |     Preventive Detention Cannot Sacrifice Personal Liberty on Mere Allegations: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention of Local Journalist    |     J.J. Act | Accused's Age at Offense Critical - Juvenility Must Be Addressed: Kerala High Court Directs Special Court to Reframe Charges in POCSO Case    |     Foreign Laws Must Be Proved Like Facts: Delhi HC Grants Bail in Cryptocurrency Money Laundering Case    |    

Bail Denied to Indian Citizen with Pakistani Roots: Court Cites Active Role in Espionage Attempt

04 September 2024 10:04 AM

By: sayum


The Gujarat High Court has denied bail to Labhshankar Duryodhan Maheshwari, an Indian citizen of Pakistani origin, accused of involvement in a case concerning the illegal transfer of sensitive information to Pakistan. The judgment, delivered by Justice M.R. Mengdey, highlights the gravity of the allegations under Sections 121A, 123, and 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), alongside offenses under the Information Technology Act, underscoring national security concerns.

Maheshwari, initially a Pakistani citizen, had relinquished his citizenship and acquired Indian citizenship. He was implicated in a case linked to the transmission of a SIM card to Pakistan, which was used to activate a WhatsApp account allegedly intended for espionage activities. The case unfolded when an Indian Air Force officer stationed in Kargil received a suspicious WhatsApp message asking him to download an APK file containing malware. Investigations revealed the SIM card involved was procured by an associate in Jamnagar and later handed over to Maheshwari, who facilitated its transport to Pakistan via his sister.

The court emphasized the severe nature of the allegations against Maheshwari. The prosecution argued that the SIM card, after being used to activate a WhatsApp account in Pakistan, was instrumental in attempting to extract sensitive information related to the Indian armed forces through malware. Justice Mengdey underscored the potential threat to national security, stating that the acts attributed to the applicant could have serious repercussions for the country's defense infrastructure.

Justice Mengdey observed that Maheshwari's involvement went beyond mere possession of the SIM card. His actions, including obtaining the One-Time Password (OTP) necessary to activate the WhatsApp account and communicating this to his counterparts in Pakistan, demonstrated active participation in the alleged espionage activities. The court noted that the applicant's prior citizenship and roots in Pakistan added a layer of complexity to the case, further justifying the denial of bail.

The court referenced the Supreme Court's ruling in Jalaluddin Khan v. Union of India, which emphasizes that bail is the rule and jail is the exception. However, Justice Mengdey noted that the seriousness of the charges and the potential threat to national security necessitated a departure from this principle. The court asserted that granting bail in such circumstances would not align with the judicial responsibility to safeguard national interests.

The Gujarat High Court's decision to deny bail to Labhshankar Duryodhan Maheshwari underscores the judiciary's stance on cases involving national security, particularly those with elements of cross-border communication and espionage. The judgment serves as a reminder of the stringent legal standards applied in cases where the security of the nation is at stake, reaffirming the importance of thorough judicial scrutiny in matters of this nature.

Date of Decision: August 22, 2024

 Labhshankar Duryodhan Maheshwari v. State of Gujarat

Similar News