NIA Gets 10-Day Remand of Two Accused: “Harboured Pakistani Terrorists Behind Pahalgam Attack”

A special NIA court granted a 10-day remand for two men accused of sheltering Pakistani terrorists behind the Pahalgam attack. Officials said, “Harboured Pakistani terrorists behind Pahalgam attack,” as the probe continues into the April incident.

NIA To Special Court: “PFI Had 977 People on Hit List, Including Ex-Kerala Judge”

During the hearing in the RSS leader Srinivasan murder case, the NIA told the Kochi court that the banned outfit PFI had prepared a hit list of 977 people, including a former Kerala District Judge.

Centre Transfers Pahalgam Terror Attack Probe to NIA | Massive Crackdown Begins

The investigation into the Pahalgam terror attack, which killed 26 people, has been handed to the NIA. A major search for the involved Lashkar terrorists is underway in Kashmir, with eyewitness accounts being collected. Officials identified 14 local terrorists, intensifying security measures and offering rewards for assistance in apprehending suspects.

NIA Blocks 26/11 Accused Tahawwur Rana’s Plea to Call Family, Cites National Security Risk

The NIA has opposed Tahawwur Rana’s request to speak with his family due to concerns he may leak sensitive information related to the 26/11 Mumbai attacks case. The agency emphasized the case’s crucial stage and the need to prioritize security and national interest over Rana’s family communications, which could jeopardize their investigation.

RSS Leader Murder| “Special Court Will Be the More Appropriate Court”: SC Declines to Hear NIA Plea Against Bail to PFI Members

Today, On 16th April, In the RSS leader Srinivasan murder case, the Supreme Court refused to entertain the NIA’s plea against bail granted to PFI members. The Court said the special court would be the more appropriate forum to seek bail cancellation.

Malegaon Blast Case || Special NIA Court Judge AK Lahoti Conducting Trial Transferred to Nashik

The judge handling the trial in the 2008 Malegaon blast case has been transferred. The incident involved a bomb explosion near a mosque in Malegaon on September 29, 2008. Six people lost their lives and over 100 were injured in the blast. The case has been ongoing for several years, dealing with serious charges and multiple accused.

2020 Bengaluru Riots Case || “Registrar General of Karnataka HC to Set Up Special UAPA Courts”: SC Denies Bail

Today, On 13rd February, The Supreme Court denied bail to the accused in the 2020 Bengaluru riots case, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The court directed the Karnataka government to establish additional special UAPA courts to expedite trials and reduce judicial backlog. This move aims to ensure swift justice and address delays in handling cases related to public safety and national security.

Supreme Court: “NIA Court Can Continue Trial Against Baramulla MP Engineer Rashid Under UAPA”S

The Supreme Court clarified that the NIA court in Delhi can continue hearing the case of Engineer Rashid. He was arrested in 2019 under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in a terror funding case. Rashid remains in jail as an accused in the matter. The ruling affirms the jurisdiction of the NIA court over the proceedings.

Separatist Leader Nayeem Ahmad Khan’s Plea For Call & E-Mulaqat Facilities || Delhi HC Seeks Tihar Jail, NIA Response

Today, On 10th February, The Delhi High Court asked the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to respond after a separatist leader requested permission to use phone calls in jail. The leader said talking to family is a basic right, but officials raised security concerns. The court has asked the NIA to share its opinion on the issue. A final decision will be taken after reviewing their reply.

PM Narendra Modi’s Visit to Patna|| “Can’t Languish in Jail Indefinitely”: SC Grants Bail to Man Accused of Planning ‘Disturbance’

The Supreme Court of India granted bail to Athar Parwez, accused of plotting disturbances during Prime Minister Modi’s visit, citing the prolonged detention without trial as an infringement of personal liberty. The court noted doubts about evidence and emphasized the need for a timely trial, ordering his release under specified conditions.