Was in illegal custody for 24 hrs, Areeb Majeed tells court

Advocate Mubin Solkar, representing Majeed, argued that the prosecution case is that Majeed was apprehended based on a source information received by the Ministry of Home Affairs about his return. “The MHA directed the NIA to investigate the case based on this information. It is not believable that despite receiving the order, the NIA sought his custody only over 20 hours after he had returned,” Solkar argued. The NIA had claimed that it had taken Majeed’s custody from the ATS on November 29.

Further, Solkar also argued that Majeed could not be charged under Unlawful Activities Prevention Act since Islamic State was not included in the schedule to fall under the definition of terrorist organisation in the country. “Islamic State was only declared a terrorist organisation in February 2015, months after the applicant’s (Majeed) arrest in the case. Hence, the charges under UAPA cannot be invoked against him,” Solkar argued.

Solkar said mere photographs showing Majeed holding weapons in his hand do not prove that he committed a terrorist activity. He also said that Majeed had no criminal antecedents and as a young boy was possibly misled. “He contacted his parents, got in touch with the Indian Consulate in Turkey and came back on his own. If he had a guilty mind, he would never have come back. If he had been in the terrorist organisation, he would not have been a fool to return,” Solkar said.

Further, the NIA has claimed that Majeed had been involved in violence for IS by adding a medical report in its chargesheet.