Bombay High Court rejects plea by person acquitted in 26/11 terror attack case for commercial driving license

The Bombay High Court on Wednesday rejected a petition filed by Faheem Arshad Mohammad Yusuf Ansari, one of the accused acquitted in the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, challenging the denial of a police clearance certificate required to obtain a commercial driving licence..Ansari, an accused acquitted in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks but convicted in the 2008 Rampur CRPF camp attack, had sought the PCC to obtain a Public Service Vehicle (PSV) badge, mandatory for plying autos commercially..A division bench of Justices AS Gadkari and RR Bhonsale dismissed his writ petition on Wednesday, holding that security concerns justified the refusal."Considering the peculiar facts of the present case and keeping in mind the question of security, we are of the opinion that the authorities have rightly refused the police clearance certificate in respect of the Public Service Vehicle (PSV) badge for driving the auto rickshaw commercially to the petitioner. In view thereof, the petition is dismissed," the Court held, while dismissing the plea..51-year old Ansari moved the court after the Mumbra police refused to issue him a clearance. He was convicted by a Rampur court for offences including waging war, and sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment, which he completed in November 2019. Meanwhile, he was also arrested in the terror attacks of 26 November 2008 of Mumbai. He was acquitted by a special court, with the acquittal later upheld by the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court..After his release, Ansari worked at a Byculla printing press and as a Zomato delivery executive during the Covid-19 pandemic, before securing a three-wheeler licence on 19 January 2024. When he applied online for a PCC in May 2024, Mumbra police rejected it in August 2024, citing him as a member of Lashkar-e-Taiba.He argued that old cases were being used to indefinitely stigmatise him and deny his right to livelihood, despite him having served his sentence and been acquitted in the terror case. .The State, however, relied on adverse intelligence inputs, describing him as a “high potential risk” who had allegedly provided “ancillary logistical support” and stressing his conviction in the Uttar Pradesh camp grenade attack, in which seven CRPF personnel and one civilian were killed..The bench accepted that applicants with serious criminal antecedents must attract adverse remarks. It held that the restriction on Ansari’s employment was a reasonable restriction imposed in the larger interest of public safety and national security.The bench noted that his avenues of work were only curtailed to exclude certain jobs and that he remained free to pursue other private or stationary employment..Advocates Payoshi Roy, Ulkesh Gangurde and Madhvi Gomathieswaran appeared for Ansari. Acting public prosecutor MM Deshmukh with additional public prosecutor Amit Palkar appeared for Maharashtra. [Read order]