• About
  • Contcat Us
Monday, January 30, 2023
Justice Bench
No Result
View All Result
  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Online Internship
  • Forums
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Online Internship
  • Forums
No Result
View All Result
justice bench
No Result
View All Result
Home News

Muslim youth who was detained on suspicion of conspiring to assassinate a Hindu man was granted bail by the Madras High Court:UAPA being invoked only to deny bail

By Justuce Bench by By Justuce Bench
August 28, 2022
in News
Reading Time: 4 mins read
0
0
Madras-HC-uapa

Madras-HC-uapa

0
SHARES
1
VIEWS

A Muslim man who was arrested under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) on suspicion of hatching a plot to assassinate a Hindu man who had objected to the conversion of his son to Islam was granted bail by the Madras High Court bench of Justices S Vaidyanathan and AD Jagadish Chandirain on Friday.

The court ruled that no one had complained about the appellant, that no one had been harmed, and that the UAPA had solely been utilised to deny the accused’s request for release.

The Court further determined that the accusations that Sadam Hussain, the appellant, sought to kill one Kumaresan because the man resisted converting his kid to Islam did not qualify as a “terrorist act” under UAPA.

READ ALSO

The Supreme Court Collegium recommends advocate Neela Gokhale as judge of the Bombay High Court

The Supreme Court Collegium recommends the appointment of judges to the Gauhati and Manipur High Courts

“Therefore, in the opinion of this court, the provisions of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act have been included only in order to deny/delay the appellant from getting bail from the court. Further, considering the facts of the case, this court is of the opinion that the allegations against the appellant do not fall within the definition of ‘Terrorist Act’ and there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against the appellant is prima facie true,” 

the court held

According to the prosecution’s argument, on March 7, 2022, a policeman located the appellant in suspicious circumstances and took him into custody.

When questioned, he allegedly admitted to the police that he was a part of the Mulsim community’s advocacy group, the Indian Muslim Development Association (IMDA).

Along with three other co-accused, he allegedly confessed to having been “deployed” there by the president of IMDA. Additionally, he allegedly admitted that the IMDA chief had requested him to signal him anytime a Kumaresan arrived so that he and the other two men could join the appellant in killing Kumaresan.

According to the authorities, Kumaresan’s son had wed a Muslim woman whose parents desired that he convert to Islam. The girl’s parents allegedly ordered the appellant and the head of IMDA to assassinate Kumaresan since he had passionately opposed the proposal.

According to the authorities, the goal of this plot was to kill Kumaresan, convert his son to Islam, and strongly warn other members of the Hindu community against marrying Muslims in order to convert them to Hinduism.

However, the justices deemed the argument regarding the motive to be incoherent.

The Court observed that the prosecution’s theory of the accused’s motivation comprises two limbs. First, removing the obstacle that prevented one Arunkumar, who had married a Muslim girl and converted from Hinduism to Islam, and second, threatening members of other communities not to engage in conflict with Muslims.

The judge’s reasoning was that if the defendant had intended to kill Kumaresan, it would have been done in secret so that he wouldn’t stand in the way of his son’s conversion to Islam. They would have killed Kumaresan in broad daylight, nevertheless, if their goal had been to terrorise those who have different ideas.

“A logical analysis would reveal that both the limbs of motive travel vice versa and they cannot be meeting at any point,” 

the Court held

The judges also took note of the police’s first registration of an offence under sections 153(A) (attempting to sow communal unrest) and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Criminal Law Amendment (CLA) Act, followed by the use of the Arms Act and UAPA provisions.

It further mentioned that the National Investigation Agency (NIA) had been contacted by the State police about this case, but the central organisation declined to take it on.

Regarding the validity of the accusations against the accused, the court made the following observations:

“From the perusal of the case diary and the materials available, other than the appellants and the other accused having been arrested based on suspicion and their confession being recorded while in custody and recovery of Bill Hooks from the other accused, there is no other material to pin point that the appellant and other accused had intended to commit the murder of Kumaresan and to create terror and fear among the public and people of other section.”

Given the foregoing, the bench released the appellant on bail with a 25,000 surety. He was warned not to break any laws while out on bail, run away, or tamper with evidence.

Additionally, he was had to give the police his phone number, passport information, and address.

For the appellant, advocate SMA Jinnah was present.

Babu Muthumeeran, an additional public prosecutor, represented the State.

The NIA was represented by Special Public Prosecutor R Karthikeyan.

Read Order

Sadam Hussain vs State represented through Inspector of Police.pdf
Tags: Justice AD Jagadish ChandiraJustice S VaidyanathanMadras High CourtUAPAReligious conversion
ShareTweetSendShare

Related Posts

Bombay high court
News

The Supreme Court Collegium recommends advocate Neela Gokhale as judge of the Bombay High Court

January 11, 2023
The Supreme Court Collegium recommends the appointment of judges to the Gauhati and Manipur High Courts
News

The Supreme Court Collegium recommends the appointment of judges to the Gauhati and Manipur High Courts

January 11, 2023
Supreme Court Collegium reiterates Nagendra Ramachandra Naik’s appointment as a Karnataka High Court judge for the third time.
News

Supreme Court Collegium reiterates Nagendra Ramachandra Naik’s appointment as a Karnataka High Court judge for the third time.

January 11, 2023
judges appointment to Andhra Pradesh and Karanataka High court
News

Collegium proposes the appointment of two judicial officers as judges of the high courts of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka.

January 11, 2023
The Uttarakhand High Court's order to the CBI to investigate former CM Trivendra Rawat was quashed by the Supreme Court.
News

The Uttarakhand High Court’s order to the CBI to investigate former CM Trivendra Rawat was quashed by the Supreme Court.

January 5, 2023
Madras-HC-uapa
News

Can the blind guide the blind? The Madras High Court orders the TN Judicial Academy to provide judges with UAPA and remand training.

December 30, 2022
google news
google news

POPULAR NEWS

Justices DY Chandrachud, AS Bopanna, and Bela M. Trivedi,

Execution of Document not to be considered based on Admission of Sign on Document Rules Supreme Court

May 12, 2022
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ADVOCATE AND LAWYER

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN ADVOCATE AND A LAWYER?

June 4, 2022
La Milano Pizzeria restrained  from representing previous association with La Pino'z - know more

La Milano Pizzeria restrained  from representing previous association with La Pino’z – know more

May 20, 2022
Why does Sequoia Capital terminate connections with Sandeep Kapoors Algo Legal? threats of ED searches, arm-twisting, and more

Why does Sequoia Capital terminate connections with Sandeep Kapoors Algo Legal? threats of ED searches, arm-twisting, and more

June 6, 2022
jug jugg jeeyo

Copyright infringement | Jugjugg Jeeyo movie stay refused by Ranchi court

June 25, 2022

Tags

advocate Algo Legal Allahabad HC Allahabad High Court Anil Deshmukh anticipatory bail Appointment of Judges bail Bombay high court calcutta high court central government cji Collegium Collegium Recommendations defamation delhi high court divorce Enforcement Directorate Gujarat High court Gyanvapi Mosque high court judges IPR Judicial Appointments justice bench karnataka high court kerala high court latest judgements legal news madras high court murder Nawab Malik patna high court pil pocso act public interest litigation Rouse Avenue Court Sequoia Capital study material supreme court Supreme Court Collegium supreme court of india UAPA Union Law Ministry Uttar Pradesh varanasi court

The Supreme Court Collegium recommends advocate Neela Gokhale as judge of the Bombay High Court

by By Justuce Bench
January 11, 2023
0
Bombay high court
News

Advocate Neela Gokhale was today recommended for promotion as judge of the Bombay High Court by the Supreme Court Collegium.

Read more

The Supreme Court Collegium recommends the appointment of judges to the Gauhati and Manipur High Courts

by By Justuce Bench
January 11, 2023
0
The Supreme Court Collegium recommends the appointment of judges to the Gauhati and Manipur High Courts
News

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court Collegium proposed the nomination of judges to the Gauhati and Manipur High Courts.

Read more

Supreme Court Collegium reiterates Nagendra Ramachandra Naik’s appointment as a Karnataka High Court judge for the third time.

by By Justuce Bench
January 11, 2023
0
Supreme Court Collegium reiterates Nagendra Ramachandra Naik’s appointment as a Karnataka High Court judge for the third time.
News

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court Collegium decided to confirm the appointment of attorney Nagendra Ramachandra Naik as a Karnataka High...

Read more

Collegium proposes the appointment of two judicial officers as judges of the high courts of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka.

by By Justuce Bench
January 11, 2023
0
judges appointment to Andhra Pradesh and Karanataka High court
News

Tuesday, the Supreme Court Collegium recommended that two judicial officers be appointed as judges of the Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka...

Read more

About

Justice Bench is one of the fastest growing news legal portal in India, for latest Latest Legal News india, Supreme Court judgement updates, High Courts Judgments updates,Law Firms News in india, Law School News, Latest Legal News india visit us.

Follow us

google news
google news

Recent Posts

  • The Supreme Court Collegium recommends advocate Neela Gokhale as judge of the Bombay High Court

Popular News

  • DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ADVOCATE AND LAWYER

    WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN ADVOCATE AND A LAWYER?

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • The Supreme Court Collegium recommends the appointment of judges to the Gauhati and Manipur High Courts

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • La Milano Pizzeria restrained  from representing previous association with La Pino’z – know more

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0

© 2022 JusticeBench  |  Privacy Policy  | Terms of Use

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Online Internship
  • Forums

© 2022 JusticeBench  |  Privacy Policy  | Terms of Use

Welcome Back!

Sign In with Google
OR

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password? Sign Up

Create New Account!

Sign Up with Google
OR

Fill the forms below to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In