SC order on UAPA
Kartavya Desk Staff
#### Facts for Prelims (FFP)
Source: TH
Context: The Supreme Court declared that investigating agencies must provide written grounds of arrest to individuals detained under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), affirming the right to life and personal liberty as sacrosanct.
About the case:
In the Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) case, the Supreme Court invalidated Newsclick founder Prabir Purkayastha’s arrest under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) due to the Delhi Police’s failure to inform him of the grounds of arrest before taking him into custody. The court emphasized that the mandate was established in the Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India & Ors. judgment, which requires providing written grounds of arrest, applies to UAPA cases as well. This requirement is rooted in Articles 22(1) and 22(5) of the Indian Constitution, which protects the rights of arrested individuals to be informed of the reasons for their arrest and to make representations against detention.
The court emphasized the importance of informing the arrested person to facilitate legal consultation, oppose custody remand, and seek bail. It found no significant difference in the language of Section 19(1) of the PMLA and Section 43B(1) of the UAPA, stating that both require written communication of arrest grounds.
Evolution of provisions of bail under UAPA by SC:
• 2008: The UAPA Amendment Act introduced Section 43D(5), shifting the burden onto the accused to prove accusations not prima facie true.
• 2016: Angela Harish Sontakke v State of Maharashtra granted bail despite stringent provisions, considering extended custody and the need for balance.
• 2019: National Investigation Agency v Zahoor Amhad Shah Watali narrowed interpretation, making bail harder after charges by NIA.
• 2021: Union of India v K.A. Najeeb highlighted the possibility of bail for prolonged incarceration violating Article 21 rights.
• State of NCT of Delhi v Devangana Kalita separated evidence from NIA inferences, leading to bail based on NIA’s failure to establish a prima facie case.
• 2023: Vernon Gonsalves v State of Maharashtra diverged from Watali, emphasizing evidence analysis.
About UAPA:
The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967, aims to prevent certain unlawful activities by individuals and associations, particularly those related to terrorism. Section 43B(1) of the UAPA mandates that any officer arresting a person under this act must inform the accused of the grounds for such arrest.