The Delhi High Court on Friday held that the accused is not entitled to get the copy of the Public Prosecutor’s (PP) report at the time of extension of remand in the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) cases during the continued investigation. The initial remand in such cases is for 90 days.
A Division Bench of Justices Mukta Gupta and Anish Dayal, while pronouncing the order in a bunch of cases clubbed together, said the accused could not be expected to be a mute spectator when he was informed about the extension of period of investigation based on PP’s report.
“...the Special Court would be required to take into consideration submissions on behalf of the accused, while examining PP’s report regarding progress of investigation, and the reasons for seeking further detention for continued investigation,” the court said.
It added that the special court would also be required to satisfy itself from the investigation carried out that there is sufficient material to form a reasonable belief that prima facie an offence under the UAPA is made out.
“Though no reasons in this regard will be required to be reflected in the order as the same would entail disclosure of the investigation carried out,” the court added.
‘Essential requirements’
The court also briefed about the “the essential requirements” to be seen by the Special Court while extending the period of remand of the accused for further period to complete the investigation under the proviso to Sub-Section 2(b) to Section 43D of the UAPA.
It added that the court must see the reasons evidencing the personal satisfaction of the PP as regards the progress of investigation made based on the investigation carried out. There should also be enough reasons indicating why the investigation could not be completed within the period of 90 days and how much time will be required for further investigation.
“All these three essential ingredients must form part of the Public Prosecutor’s report, based on which the Special Court would arrive at the satisfaction to extend the period of remand,” the court maintained.
The Bench further said that the Special Court should apply its mind to find out the reasonable time required to complete the investigation and extend the period of custody for such period up to 90 days.
“Needless to note that whenever extension is granted by the Special Court .... the same has to be based on the fresh report of the PP. Such an approach will strike an equitable balance between the right of accused from not suffering meaningless continued detention without investigation and the right of the investigating agency to conclude the investigation fairly, covering all facets,” the court mentioned.
The pleas were moved by Zeeshan Qamar, who was arrested from his residence in Uttar Pradesh in September last year in an FIR related to existence of an alleged terror module. Mohammed Manan Dar, a Kashmir-based freelance photojournalist, was one of the other applicants in the case among others.
