news details |
|
|
| 5 yrs in jail, still no bail: HC rejects relief to UAPA accused in Doda terror-funding case | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Apr 9: In a significant ruling with serious security overtones, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed the bail appeal of Khalid Latif Butt, an accused in a terror-funding case linked to alleged Lashkar-e-Taiba activities in Doda, holding that the material on record prima facie points to his direct involvement in offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
A Division Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar upheld the January 4, 2025 order of the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu, which had denied bail to the accused in FIR No. 42/2020. The Bench ruled that the bar contained in Section 43-D(5) of the UAPA squarely applies, as the offences alleged against the appellant fall under Chapters IV and VI of the Act.
As per the prosecution case, the accused was part of an LeT module and had allegedly received funds from Pakistan-based handler Haroon alias Khubaib for further distribution in connection with terrorist activities in the Doda area. The prosecution also alleged that money received by the appellant was used for payment related to movement of arms and ammunition, and that SIM cards and grenades were passed on through the accused on the directions of handlers.
The High Court noted that the case against the appellant was not based merely on his disclosure statement, as argued by the defence, but also on bank transactions allegedly reflecting transfer of funds into his SBI account from Haroon. The Bench observed that the appellant had failed to explain the legality of the transaction and that the material collected during investigation could not, at this stage, be brushed aside as weak or peripheral.
Rejecting the argument that more than five years of incarceration entitled the accused to bail, the court held that prolonged custody alone cannot become a ground for release in grave offences involving terror funding and activities threatening the unity, integrity and sovereignty of the country. The Bench said the allegations suggested not just receipt of funds, but knowledge of their use for terrorist purposes, including purchase and transportation of arms and use of SIM cards by co-accused for terror activities.
JKUT (Jammu), April-09-2026-( JNF):- In a significant ruling with serious security overtones, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed the bail appeal of Khalid Latif Butt, an accused in a terror-funding case linked to alleged Lashkar-e-Taiba activities in Doda, holding that the material on record prima facie points to his direct involvement in offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
A Division Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar upheld the January 4, 2025 order of the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu, which had denied bail to the accused in FIR No. 42/2020. The Bench ruled that the bar contained in Section 43-D(5) of the UAPA squarely applies, as the offences alleged against the appellant fall under Chapters IV and VI of the Act.
As per the prosecution case, the accused was part of an LeT module and had allegedly received funds from Pakistan-based handler Haroon alias Khubaib for further distribution in connection with terrorist activities in the Doda area. The prosecution also alleged that money received by the appellant was used for payment related to movement of arms and ammunition, and that SIM cards and grenades were passed on through the accused on the directions of handlers.
The High Court noted that the case against the appellant was not based merely on his disclosure statement, as argued by the defence, but also on bank transactions allegedly reflecting transfer of funds into his SBI account from Haroon. The Bench observed that the appellant had failed to explain the legality of the transaction and that the material collected during investigation could not, at this stage, be brushed aside as weak or peripheral.
Rejecting the argument that more than five years of incarceration entitled the accused to bail, the court held that prolonged custody alone cannot become a ground for release in grave offences involving terror funding and activities threatening the unity, integrity and sovereignty of the country. The Bench said the allegations suggested not just receipt of funds, but knowledge of their use for terrorist purposes, including purchase and transportation of arms and use of SIM cards by co-accused for terror activities. (JNF) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
