HC denies bail to UAPA accused in Doda terror-funding case
10/04/2026
JAMMU, Apr 9: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed the bail appeal of an accused in a terror-funding case linked to alleged Lashkar-e-Taiba activities in Doda, observing that the material on record prima facie indicates his direct involvement.
A Division Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar upheld the January 4, 2025 order of the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu, which had denied bail to Khalid Latif Butt in FIR No. 42/2020.
The Bench ruled that the statutory bar under Section 43-D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) squarely applied, as the offences alleged fall under Chapters IV and VI of the Act.
According to the prosecution, the accused was part of a Lashkar-e-Taiba module and had allegedly received funds from a Pakistan-based handler, Haroon alias Khubaib, for distribution in connection with terrorist activities in the Doda area. The funds were allegedly used for facilitating the movement of arms and ammunition, while SIM cards and grenades were also passed on through the accused on the handlers' directions.
The High Court observed that the case was not based merely on the disclosure statement of the accused but was also supported by bank transactions reflecting the transfer of funds into his SBI account. The appellant failed to explain the legality of these transactions, the court noted.
Rejecting the argument that more than five years of incarceration entitled the accused to bail, the Bench held that prolonged custody alone cannot be a ground for release in grave offences involving terror funding and activities threatening the unity and sovereignty of the country.
The court also held that the Supreme Court judgments cited by the appellant, including K.A. Najeeb, Vernon, and Shiekh Javid Iqbal, were distinguishable on facts, as the present case indicated prima facie direct involvement rather than a peripheral role.
While dismissing the appeal, the Bench granted liberty to the appellant to file a fresh bail application after the examination of the remaining material witnesses and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Share This Story |
|
Comment On This Story |
|
|
|
|