Overview

• The bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur invoked Section 43D(5) of the UAPA after holding the accusations to be prima facie true.
• The court relied on protected-witness statements and circumstantial material including public speeches, WhatsApp chats and pamphlets to accept a broad conspiracy theory.
• A separate bench rejected Tasleem Ahmed’s bail plea, finding that repeated adjournments by co‑accused caused delays that could not be used to claim a right to release.
• The nine accused have spent about five years in custody with the case still at the stage of arguments on charge, a timeline the defence says violates the right to a speedy trial.
• Legal commentators highlight tension with Supreme Court precedents that granted bail in lengthy UAPA detentions, citing decisions such as KA Najeeb and Athar Parwez.