Advocate Balraj Singh Malik, representing one of the accused in the Parliament security breach case, argued before a Delhi court on Monday that the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) should not be applied to young individuals who express frustration with the government’s authoritarian behavior.
NEW DELHI: On Monday(9th Sept), the Patiala House Court reserved its decision on Neelam Azad’s bail plea in the Parliament security breach case. After hearing the arguments, Additional Sessions Judge Hardeep Kaur scheduled the pronouncement of the order for September 11, 2024.
Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Akhand Pratap Singh opposed Azad’s bail, arguing that substantial, credible evidence exists against her, justifying her continued detention under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967.
The SPP contended that the tripe test principles—flight risk, witness tampering, and evidence destruction—are not satisfied in this case due to the accused’s potential influence and power.
The SPP also highlighted the severity of the offense and the evidence suggesting Azad’s involvement, which he argued disqualifies her from bail.
Advocate Balraj Singh Malik, representing one of the accused in the Parliament security breach case, argued before a Delhi court on Monday that the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) should not be applied to young individuals who express frustration with the government’s authoritarian behavior.
“You cannot silence the youth of this nation,” Malik stated in the court of Additional Sessions Judge Hardeep Kaur, while seeking bail for his client, Neelam Ranoliya, one of six people charged in connection with the breach that occurred on December 13 last year.
Advocate Malik argued that Neelam was not involved in any conspiracy, stating that she was outside Parliament at the time of the breach and only possessed a canister, with no casualties resulting from her actions.
In his argument for bail, Malik emphasized that ordinary citizens, not parliamentarians, are the true “owners” of the country. He noted that Ranoliya had already spent nine months in custody, and with 133 witnesses in the case, the trial would be lengthy.
Malik also referred to the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh case, suggesting that the court had adopted a more lenient stance when granting bail to UAPA accused.
READ ALSO: BREAKING | SC Quashes Arrest and Remand of NewsClick Editor Prabir Purkayastha Under UAPA
Singh countered that the Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh case, cited by the defense, is significantly different from the current case. He noted that the accused in the Shaikh case had been in judicial custody for four years without charges being framed, whereas in this case, the chargesheet was filed within the required time frame.
Earlier, on June 7, 2024, Delhi Police filed a comprehensive 1000-page chargesheet against the six accused: Manoranjan D, Lalit Jha, Amol Shinde, Mahesh Kumawat, Sagar Sharma, and Neelam Azad.
Amol Shinde was arrested for deploying smoke canisters, while Manoranjan and Sagar were charged with entering the Lok Sabha hall from the visitors’ gallery and releasing smoke canisters on December 13, 2023. Jha is accused of tampering with evidence.
All the accused are currently in judicial custody until October 16.
Malik also challenged the prosecution’s choice to send digital evidence to the National Forensic Sciences University (NFSU) in Gujarat, questioning whether Gujarat is the only state making progress. In response, the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) explained that the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) in Rohini is overloaded, and thus the material was sent to Gujarat to speed up the process.
Delhi LG VK Saxena recently approved prosecution under UAPA for the six accused in the December 13, 2023, Parliament attack. The accused are alleged to have illegally entered Parliament and thrown smoke canisters during a live session. The Delhi Police had sought prosecution under sections 16 and 18 of UAPA from the Lt. Governor, who granted it after finding sufficient evidence. The Review Committee also confirmed the involvement of the accused.
The Delhi Police had registered a case/FIR 14.12.2023, u/s 186/353/452/153/34/1208 of IPC and 13/16/18 UA (P) Act, at the Parliament Street Police Station on the complaint made by the security officer in the Lok Sabha.
All six accused are currently in judicial custody, and the case involves a security breach on the anniversary of the Parliament attack on December 13, 2023.
