New Delhi [India], March 13 : The Delhi High Court on Friday allowed the Parliament Security breach case accused Neelam Azad to appear in the LLB Entrance Test outside Delhi NCR.
In order to enable her to appear in the Entrance Test, the Delhi High Court modified the bail conditions imposed upon her while granting bail in July last year.
Division bench comprising Justices Subramonium Prasad and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar modified the bail conditions imposed upon Neelam Azad. The high court has asked her to inform the investigation officer of the date of the Entrance Test.
On July 2, 2025, the Delhi High Court granted bail to Neelam Azad and Mahesh Kumawat in connection with the Parliament security breach case.
The bail was sanctioned upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs 50,000 along with two sureties each. Their earlier bail pleas had been rejected by the trial court.
The division bench, comprising Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, imposed strict conditions as part of the bail order. The accused have been prohibited from holding press conferences, giving media interviews, or posting on social media about the incident.
Additionally, the Court directed both individuals to report to the concerned police station every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at 10:00 a.m. They had also been barred from leaving the National Capital Territory of Delhi.
Delhi Police opposed the bail, asserting that substantial and compelling evidence exists against the accused. They cited credible documents and material suggesting the accused's involvement in activities punishable under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA).
The prosecution argued that the case fails the "triple test" for bail eligibility--namely, the risk of flight, the possibility of influencing witnesses, and potential tampering with evidence. Citing the accused as "powerful and influential," the police maintained that their release could hinder the ongoing investigation. The gravity of the offence and the severity of the potential punishment were also emphasised as critical considerations.
Counsel representing the accused contested the prosecution's claims, arguing that no evidence indicates a threat to national economic security or sovereignty. They criticised the invocation of UAPA as an attempt to suppress dissent.
The defence further alleged that the accused were physically assaulted within the Parliament complex, questioning the prosecution's narrative surrounding the events of the day.
On June 7, 2024, the Delhi Police filed a charge sheet spanning approximately 1,000 pages against six accused: Manoranjan D, Lalit Jha, Amol Dhanraj Shinde, Mahesh Kumawat, Sagar Sharma, and Neelam Azad.
The charges stem from a security breach that occurred on December 13, 2023--coinciding with the anniversary of the 2001 Parliament attack. The accused are alleged to have unlawfully entered the Lok Sabha during a live session and deployed smoke canisters.
Following a review, the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi granted prosecution sanction under Sections 16 and 18 of the UAPA. The Review Committee at Tis Hazari also examined the evidence and concluded that a prima facie case existed against all six individuals.
Initially, an FIR was registered on December 14, 2023, under IPC Sections 186, 353, 452, 153, 34, and 120B, along with Sections 13, 16, and 18 of the UAPA, based on a complaint by a Lok Sabha security officer. The investigation was later transferred to the Counter-Intelligence Unit of the Special Cell, New Delhi.