New Delhi [India], July 16 : The Special NIA Court in New Delhi has rejected the third bail application of E Abubacker, founding Chairman of the Popular Front of India (PFI), in a case registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
The court had recently framed charges against PFI leaders, including E Abubacker and other accused persons, under allegations related to terror conspiracy, terror funding and conspiracy to wage war against the country.
Abubacker, who was arrested in 2022, had sought bail citing delay in the trial, along with grounds related to his health condition, speedy trial and changes in legal provisions concerning bail under UAPA cases.
Special NIA Judge Prashant Sharma of the Patiala House Court on Wednesday rejected the bail application after considering the submissions made by the counsel for the accused and the National Investigation Agency (NIA).
The court said that the aspect of delay is not to be appreciated in isolation. The circumstances which are prevailing in this case have to be appreciated for the purpose of appreciating the aspect of delay in trial.
"Those circumstances include the gravity of offence, workload on this court, number of accused persons involved, number of counsels representing accused persons and likewise," the Special Judge said on July 15.
The court said that the Counsel for the accused has not referred to these factors while raising the issue of delay in the trial. As such, his argument is not based on any reasons.
"The pendency of matter before the concerned court where the charge-sheet is filed, the reason for delay and other administrative aspects are not highlighted by learned Counsel for the accused. Therefore, with regard to the delay in the trial, it is meritless. Same stands dismissed," Special Judge held.
"In view of the aforesaid appreciation and facts and circumstances of this case, I do not find any ground to grant bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the present bail application of applicant/ accused E. Abubacker stands dismissed," the judge ordered.
The counsel for the accused sought bail on the grounds of speedy trial, change in law regarding bail in UAPA cases, his health condition and his custody since his arrest on September 22, 2022.
Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Rahul Tyagi alongwith Jatin Khatri and Amit Rohila, appeared for NIA and argued that the application must be dismissed.
NIA's SPP claimed that there is evidence against the applicant which prima facie shows his involvement in the offences for which he is charge-sheeted.
It was also submitted that this court had dismissed the bail application of the applicant on November 14, 2022. Subsequently, the appeal preferred by the applicant was withdrawn by him before the High Court of Delhi.
Subsequently, the applicant preferred a bail application before this court, which was dismissed vide order dated 09.06.2023, and against said order, the applicant preferred a criminal appeal, which was dismissed by
The Delhi High Court observed that allegations and averments appeared in the charge-sheet with respect to the commission of offences falling under Chapter IV and Chapter VI of UAPA are prima facie true.
The court had called for a medical report of the applicant from Tihar Jail and from the concerned treating doctor at Apollo Hospital.
The concerned Medical Officer, Incharge, Tihar Jail, filed a medical report stating that although the applicant is having difficulty in walking, slowness in speech, difficulty in swallowing, and fluctuating blood sugar level, he is being given proper medical assistance by the concerned doctor.
The medical condition of the applicant is stable, and he is getting treatment from GNEC Hospital, MAIDS Hospital, DDU Hospital, Safdurjung Hospital, GB Pant Hospital and AIIMS Hospital, the report stated.
The concerned doctor from Indraprastha Apollo Hospital filed a report on 13.07.2026 highlighting the medical condition of the applicant. She joined the proceedings today, virtually and apprised that the medical condition of the applicant has not deteriorated.
She replied further that the applicant is getting proper medical treatment and he needs assistance for his personal care, which can be provided in jail or in a government hospital, the court said in the order.