Suspected ISIS member Areeb Majeed being taken court by police security personnel in 2014. (Express File Photo by Ganesh Shirsekar)
The Supreme Court Friday dismissed a plea by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) seeking to cancel the bail granted by the Bombay High Court to a Kalyan man accused of travelling to Iraq and Syria to join the terrorist organisation Islamic State (IS).
A bench of Justice S Abdul Nazeer and Justice A S Bopanna, which was hearing a special leave petition filed by NIA argued through Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, refused to interfere in the HC order, stating that stringent conditions were already imposed by the High Court while granting bail to the accused, Areeb Majeed.
You’ve Read Your Free Stories For Now
Sign up and keep reading more stories that matter to you.
Majeed, who appeared in person before the Bombay High Court to argue his case, was granted bail on February 23.
Noting that the right to fair and speedy trial was recognised under Article 21 (right to life) of the Constitution, the high court had held that the same was applicable to Majeed given that “there was no likelihood of the trial being completed within a reasonable time”.
The High Court had upheld the bail granted by the Special NIA Court on March 17, 2020, “on the ground of the accused having already undergone incarceration for more than six years” and the likelihood of the trial being delayed.
A civil engineering student when he went missing in May 2014, Majeed was among the first group of youths alleged to have left India to join the IS.
The High Court had referred to a Supreme Court ruling that had held that rigorous stringent bail provisions as per Section 43D (5) of the UAPA would “melt down” with “no likelihood of the trial being completed in reasonable time and period of incarceration already exceeding substantial part of the prescribed sentence”.
Story continues below this ad
The Bombay HC had imposed stringent conditions for bail, granted on a personal bond of Rs 1 lakh and sureties. Majeed has to report to the nearest police station on a regular basis and the NIA officer concerned once a week, stay with his family in Kalyan, and not make any statements regarding proceedings pending before the Special Court in any form.
Warning him against any activity similar to the allegations against him, the HC had said, “He shall not try to establish communication with (the) co-accused or any other person involved directly or indirectly in similar activities or make any international call to any person indulging in similar activities as alleged against him, through any mode of communication.”
Directing Majeed’s cooperation for expeditious disposal of the trial and in observing the bail conditions, the Bench said that in case of any violation, his bail would be liable to be cancelled.
On Friday, ASG Raju submitted before the Supreme Court that bail granted to Majeed be cancelled as the case was under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and Majeed’s decent behaviour in court was a ground for bail before HC.
Story continues below this ad
Raju said Majeed is a terrorist who went to Syria and then returned to India with the intention to carry out terrorist acts, including blowing up the Police Headquarters in Mumbai, and, therefore, it was better if he stayed in jail.
The bench, however, noted that stringent conditions have already been imposed by HC while granting bail. “What is a question of law? Why should we interfere? read all the bail conditions. He was already in jail for almost six and half years,” the Supreme Court said as it refused to entertain NIA’s plea.
Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions.
Expertise & Authority
Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage.
Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in:
Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include:
Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes).
Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty).
Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict.
Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability.
Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges.
Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More
