Section 32 Arbitration Act | Termination for Non-Payment of Fees Ends Arbitrator’s Mandate; Remedy Lies in Section 14(2): Supreme Court False Allegations of Dowry and Bigamy Amount to Mental Cruelty: Madras High Court Upholds Divorce Plaintiff Must Prove Her Own Title Before Seeking Demolition Of Defendant’s Pre-existing House: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mismatch Between Bullet and Recovered Gun Fatal to Prosecution: Calcutta High Court Acquits Man Convicted for Murder Where the Conduct of the Sole Eye-Witness Appears Unnatural and No Independent Witness Is Examined, Conviction Cannot Stand: Allahabad High Court Fraudulent Sale of Vehicle During Hire Purchase Renders Agreement Void: Gauhati High Court Upholds Decree for Refund of ₹4.90 Lakhs Unsigned Written Statement Can’t Silence a Defendant: Hyper-Technical Objections Must Yield to Substantive Justice: Delhi High Court Default Bail | No Accused, No Extension: Delhi High Court Rules Custody Extension Without Notice as Gross Illegality Under Article 21 Gratuity Can Be Withheld Post-Retirement for Proven Negligence Under Service Rules – Payment of Gratuity Act Does Not Override CDA Rules: Calcutta High Court Cognizance Is of the Offence, Not the Offender: Madras High Court Rejects Challenge to ED’s Supplementary Complaint in PMLA Case Acquittal in Rajasthan No Bar to Trial in Madhya Pradesh: MP High Court Rejects Double Jeopardy Plea in Antiquities Theft Case 20% Deposit Isn’t Automatic in Cheque Bounce Appeals: Right to Appeal Can’t Be Priced Out: Punjab & Haryana High Court Checks Mechanical Use of Section 148 NI Act A Child Is Not a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets New Benchmark in Compensation for Minors’ Deaths 90 Days Is Not Sacrosanct – Courts Can Permit Reply to Counter-Claim Even Beyond Prescribed Time in Interest of Justice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Magistrate Can Proceed Only for Offences Committed in India Until Sanction Is Obtained for Acts Outside India: Orissa High Court on International Financial Fraud Award Is Vitiated by Non-Consideration of Material Evidence: Orissa High Court Sets Aside Industrial Tribunal’s Wage Award in IMFA Case POCSO | Absence of Child's Name in Birth Certificate Not Fatal: Kerala High Court No One Has the Right to Impute Illicit Motives to Judges in the Name of Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Jails Man for Criminal Contempt DV Complaint Cannot Be Quashed at Threshold Under Article 227: Madras High Court Refuses to Interfere, Directs Accused to Seek Remedy Before Magistrate Recovery Wasn't From Accused's Exclusive Knowledge — Cylinder Already Marked in Site Plan Before Arrest: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man in Murder Case State Can’t Block SARFAESI Sale by Late Revenue Entries: Secured Creditor’s Charge Prevails Over Tax Dues: Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Sub-Registrar’s Refusal Providing SIM Card Without Knowledge of Its Criminal Use Does Not Imply Criminal Conspiracy: P&H High Court Grants Bail in UAPA & Murder Case Importer Who Accepts Enhanced Valuation Cannot Later Contest Confiscation and Penalty for Undervaluation: Madras High Court Upholds Strict Liability under Customs Act "Allegations Are Not Proof: Madras High Court Refuses Divorce Without Substantiated Cruelty or Desertion" When FIR Is Filed After Consulting Political Leaders, the Possibility of Coloured Version Cannot Be Ruled Out: Kerala High Court Mere Allegations of Antecedents Without Conviction Can't Defeat Right to Anticipatory Bail: Kerala High Court Section 106 Of Evidence Act Cannot Be Invoked In Vacuum – Prosecution Must First Lay Foundational Facts: Karnataka High Court Acquits Wife And Co-Accused In Husband’s Murder Case Parity Cannot Be Claimed When Roles Are Different: Karnataka High Court Refuses Bail to Youth Accused of Brutal Killing Injured Wife Would Not Falsely Implicate Her Husband: Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction in Domestic Stabbing Case Disputed Bids, Missing Evidence and No Prejudice: Delhi High Court Refuses to Intervene in Tender Challenge under Article 226 Setting Fire to House Where Only Minors Were Present is a Heinous Offence – No Quashing Merely Because Parties Settled: Calcutta High Court No Exclusive Possession Means Licence, Not Lease: Calcutta High Court Rules City Civil Court Has Jurisdiction to Evict Licensees Defendant's Own Family Attested the Sale Agreement – Yet She Called It Nominal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Specific Performance Renewal Not Automatic, No Evidence Of Notice Or Mutual Agreement: AP High Court Dismisses Indian Oil’s Appeal Against Eviction

Gujarat High Court Denies Bail in Sensitive ISRO Espionage Case, Highlights Unauthorized Sharing of Information

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


High Court Court rejects bail for Kalpeshkumar Babubhai Turi, stressing the gravity of unauthorized communication of ISRO data to foreign entity.

The Gujarat High Court has denied the bail application of Kalpeshkumar Babubhai Turi, accused of sharing sensitive information related to the Space Applications Centre of ISRO with a contact in Pakistan. The decision, pronounced by Justice M. R. Mengdey, underscores the critical nature of unauthorized dissemination of information and the ongoing trial proceedings that necessitate the applicant's continued custody.

Kalpeshkumar Babubhai Turi, an employee of ISRO's Space Applications Centre, was arrested under allegations of transmitting sensitive information to a contact in Pakistan. The FIR (C.R. No. II-02 of 2023) filed at the Anti-Terrorism Police Station in Ahmedabad invoked Sections 66 F(1)(B) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The prosecution claims that Turi shared unauthorized photographs of ISRO's premises, raising concerns about national security.

The High Court scrutinized the communication from the Head, P & GA Department of Space, Space Applications Centre, which stated that the information shared was not classified as secret, confidential, or sensitive. However, the court emphasized that the unauthorized nature of the shared photographs from within a high-security area like ISRO remains a significant breach.

Turi's defense, led by senior advocate Mr. Shalin Mehta, argued that the images were innocuous selfies and did not contain any confidential data. Additionally, Turi claimed ignorance about the contact’s location in Pakistan and highlighted his unblemished 17-year career at ISRO.

The prosecution, represented by APP Mr. J.K. Shah, contended that the transmission of any information from a sensitive installation like ISRO to a foreign entity is inherently dangerous. The fact that Turi did not have authorization to take and share these photographs exacerbates the severity of the offense.

Justice Mengdey noted that the previous bail application was withdrawn with the liberty to reapply if the trial did not conclude within six months. Since the trial had commenced and witnesses were being examined, no substantial change in circumstances justified granting bail at this stage. The court acknowledged that the material evidence, including the communication dated 27.02.2023, would be crucial during the trial but refrained from pre-empting the trial court’s assessment.

Justice Mengdey remarked, "While the files forwarded may not have been classified as secret, the unauthorized dissemination of information from a high-security government establishment cannot be taken lightly."

The Gujarat High Court's decision to deny bail to Kalpeshkumar Babubhai Turi reinforces the judiciary's stance on safeguarding national security against unauthorized information leaks. The ruling highlights the importance of stringent measures against breaches in sensitive installations, ensuring that even non-classified information is protected from potential misuse. The case continues to unfold in the trial court, where further scrutiny of the evidence will determine the final outcome.

 

Date of Decision: June 10, 2024

Kalpeshkumar Babubhai Turi vs. State of Gujarat

Latest Legal News