[Delhi Riots] Delhi High Court issues notice on plea by Tahir Hussain challenging applicability of UAPA charges

The Delhi High Court on Friday issued notice to Central government, Delhi Police Commissioner and the NCT of Delhi on a petition filed by ex-Councillor Tahir Hussain, challenging the applicability of provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA) in a Delhi riots case in which he has been chargesheeted. .Justice Mukta Gupta issued notice after briefly hearing Senior Advocate Mohit Mathur, who appeared for Hussain. Advocate Amit Mahajan, who accepted notice on behalf of Central government and Delhi Police Commissioner, raised a preliminary objection to the petition stating that cognisance of the charges in the case had been taken..Mahajan said he would be filing a reply to the petition.The petition challenged imposition of Sections 13 (punishment for unlawful activities), 16 (punishment for terrorist act), 17 (punishment for raising funds for terrorist act) and 18 (punishment for conspiracy) of the UAPA in the chargesheet filed against Hussain in FIR No. 59/2020 on the basis of the material put on record by the investigating agency.The plea raised questions regarding legality of the grant for prosecution on the basis of the said sections. Hussain submitted that he has been in jail now for over 14 months and given the stringent provisions of UAPA, it had become “extremely difficult” to secure bail.Hussain in his plea highlighted the procedure for grant of sanction for prosecution under UAPA. In this regard, he referred to Section 45(2) which says that a “review committee is to make an independent review of the material collected under investigation and on basis of such independent review is to make a recommendation to the concerned government whether sanction for prosecution should be granted or not”.The government concerned is required to take into account this recommendation by the review committee required to make an independent review of the material collected under investigation, Hussain contended.In this case, the petitioner also claimed that the review committee was given the investigation report running into 24,000 pages on July 30, 2020 and the committee furnished its report on July 31. "It is stated that this authority required to make an independent review, as stated in the said letter ‘was satisfied with the material available on record and facts and circumstances therein’ and accordingly recommended the sanction for prosecution. It is respectfully submitted that it is being stated that the review authority was able to make independent review of more than 24,000 pages in less than a day,” the petition filed through advocates Sujit Gupta and Devesh Kr Malan pointed out. The case will be heard next on September 28.