MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Bail In UAPA Case: No Reasonable Grounds to Believe Accusations Are Prima Facie True: P&H HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Punjab and Haryana High Court, in a significant ruling today, granted regular bail to Nirmal Singh alias Nimma, setting aside the previous order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Moga. The appellant was denied bail under various stringent laws, including the Arms Act, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), and the Explosive Substances Act.

The bench, comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal and Hon’ble Ms. Justice Kirti Singh, critically examined the material on record. The court observed a notable absence of prima facie material linking Singh to the alleged offenses. In a pivotal statement, the bench declared, "There are no reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against the appellant is prima facie true."

This observation formed the crux of the court's decision, emphasizing the lack of substantial evidence against Singh. The appellant, who had been in custody for over a year, was primarily implicated based on a co-accused's statement, which the court found insufficient without corroborating evidence, such as recovery or call detail records.

In their detailed analysis, the Justices also took into account the stringent provisions of the UAPA Act, under which bail is generally challenging to secure. The court's decision to grant bail, despite these provisions, highlights their careful scrutiny of the accusations and evidence presented.

Date of Decision: November 30, 2023

Nirmal Singh alias Nimma  VS State of Punjab

Latest Legal News