2023 Parliament breach case: Why Delhi High Court referred to SC’s expanded definition of terrorist act
On Thursday, a division bench of Justices Prathiba Singh and Madhu Jain in the HC, were hearing bail pleas of Parliament security breach case accused Manoranjan D, Lalit Jha and Sagar Sharma, who are facing charges under UAPA.
The Delhi High Court on Thursday suggested that the prosecution as well as the accused in the 2023 Parliament security breach case, while making submissions, should take into account the Supreme Court’s recent judgement, which has expanded the definition of what constitutes a terrorist act.
On January 5, while granting bail to five of the seven accused in the 2020 Northeast Delhi riots larger conspiracy case and denying bail to activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, the SC had expanded the scope of the definition of terrorist act under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
The verdict of the two-judge bench in effect created a hierarchy of offenders, even when all the accused are booked for similar charges under UAPA. The bench ruled that the means of committing such acts are not only confined to the use of bombs, explosives, firearms, or other conventional weapons.
On Thursday, a division bench of Justices Prathiba Singh and Madhu Jain in the HC were hearing bail pleas of Parliament security breach case accused Manoranjan D, Lalit Jha and Sagar Sharma, who are facing charges under UAPA.
On December 13, 2023 — also the anniversary of the 2001 Parliament terror attack — they had allegedly launched coordinated gas attacks, both inside and outside Parliament, purportedly protesting against unemployment.
The bench orally inquired about the choice of date for marking the protest. “It (the choice of date of December 13) can’t be a coincidence… it was the very same day… they picked the day,” it orally remarked.
Earlier, it had also referred to SC’s January 5 judgment in the case of Gulfisha Fatima versus state, suggesting to the counsels to take the same into consideration while addressing arguments in the case.
Story continues below this ad
Last July, the HC had granted bail to two other accused — Neelam Ranolia and Mahesh Kumawat — in the security breach case for allegedly opening smoke canisters and raising slogans outside the Parliament, noting that they “have not propagated any movement which can be said to be against the interest of the nation” and their “symbolic protest” do not prima facie constitute a terrorist act, and does not satisfy the ingredients of terrorist act as defined under UAPA.
While Manoranjan D and Sagar Sharma allegedly jumped inside the Lok Sabha Hall from the visitors’ gallery and opened smoke canisters, Jha has been accused of destroying evidence of the conspiracy in the case.
The HC will hear the bail pleas of the three accused next on February 2.
Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express. Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court
Professional Profile
Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express.
Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare).
Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others.
She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020.
With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram
Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025)
Her recent reporting from the Delhi High Court covers major political, constitutional, corporate, and public-interest legal battles:
High-Profile Case Coverage
She has extensively covered the various legal battles - including for compensation under the aegis of North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission - pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, as well as 1984 anti-Sikh riots.
She has also led coverage at the intersection of technology and governance, and its impact on the citizenry, from, and beyond courtrooms — such as the government’s stakeholder consultations for framing AI-Deepfake policy.
Signature Style
Sohini is recognized for her sustained reporting from courtrooms and beyond. She specialises in breaking down dense legal arguments to make legalese accessible for readers. Her transition from Gujarat to Delhi has seen her expand her coverage on regulatory, corporate and intellectual property law, while maintaining a strong commitment to human rights and lacuna in the criminal justice system.
X (Twitter): @thanda_ghosh ... Read More
