Madras High Court grants bail to Madurai lawyer M Mohammed Abbas booked under UAPA for alleged PFI links

The Madras High Court Tuesday granted bail to Madurai based lawyer M Mohammed Abbas who was arrested and booked under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) by the National Investigating Agency (NIA) on charges of being an alleged member of the banned Popular Front of India (PFI)..A bench of Justices M Sundar and R Sakthivel also rejected the NIA's oral request seeking leave under Article 134 of the Constitution, to challenge the bail order before the Supreme Court.The NIA Special Public Prosecutor N Baaskaran sought leave claiming that Section 43 D of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) under which Abbas has been charged, imposes a bar on grant of bail and the interpretation of such provision by the High Court needs to be examined.The bench, however, said the Supreme Court had already examined and interpreted the proviso under Section 43D(5) on grant of bail under UAPA, "in a long line of cases." It said it had referred to several of such Supreme Court orders while granting bail in the present case and therefore, no grounds for leave under Article 134 arose, the Court said..The Court went through the case diary and an audio clip that the NIA had submitted in a sealed cover. The NIA had said the audio clip contained parts of a phone conversation between Abbas and some other persons, and that the conversation clearly implicated Abbas.However, the Court said that the case diary and the audio clip did not reveal any overt act against Abbas..It further said that PFI did "not find place in the First Schedule of UAPA" that defines terrorist organisations. Besides, the FIR in the case was registered before PFI was banned by the Central government and declared an unlawful association.."The prosecution has to show that there is prima facie material available to negative the bail plea and the activities committed by the petitioner would attract Section 43D(5) and proviso thereat. In the case on hand, a perusal of the case diary shows that there is no specific overt act against the petitioner and only a cell phone, two said pen drives (from the residence of petitioner) and long knives and axe (from the farm house of petitioner) were recovered. The contents of pen drives are not known. Charge sheet as regards the petitioner is yet to be filed. Further, the trial court in its impugned order has categorically said that the question of absconding of the petitioner may not arise since he is an Advocate," the High Court said..The bench, however, dismissed the quashing petition filed by Abbas, wherein he had claimed that his arrest was a clear case of malafide as the NIA had found an easy victim in him. The plea said that the central agency was particularly offended by a Facebook post and a complaint against one if its Superintendents of Police made by Abbas, and that the post and complaint were the immediate triggers for his arrest.The High Court, however, said the special court should decide on the issue of malafide at the time of trial.It also closed the Habeas Corpus petition filed by Abbas' family members following his arrest..Abbas and 4 others were arrested by the NIA on May 9 in connection with the Tamil Nadu PFI criminal conspiracy case.According to a press release by NIA, investigations revealed that the accused had conspired and planned to eliminate their 'perceived enemies' who were not aligned to the PFI ideology and were opposed to its plans to establish an Islamic State in India by 2047.The release further stated that in pursuance of the conspiracy, the accused had radicalized a large number of PFI cadres, especially youth, handpicked by the outfit’s leadership, and had also trained them in the use of different kinds of weapons to assault, maim and kill their adversaries.Abbas's counsel R Vivekananthan, and office bearers of the Madurai Bar Association vouched before the bench that Abbas was a senior and a respected member of the Bar. They said he had been a regular practitioner before the Madurai courts and that he had been practicing for the last 16 years. He had also contested the last TN Bar Council elections and lost by a few votes. He secured 900 votes, they said.Advocate Vivekananthan also told the Court that Abbas had been regularly appearing in courts for the PFI until it was banned and was therefore, being victimised.However, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the NIA, told the Court that the central agency had adequate evidence, including an "incriminating" audio clip against Abbas.He further said that the agency had treaded cautiously because Abbas was a lawyer himself. However, the mere fact that he was a lawyer should not act as any sort of "guaranteed protection" for an accused, Mehta said..The Court directed Abbas to execute a bond and furnish two sureties for a sum of rupees one lakh. It also directed him to stay in Chennai, to cooperate with the probe agency, and to keep his mobile phone "active and charged" at all times to ensure he was reachable always. .[Read Order]