Bearing in mind elements like “flight threat” and “threat of witness tampering or elimination”, the Supreme Court docket Tuesday rejected the bail plea of an accused dealing with costs beneath UAPA for his alleged function within the smuggling 2,988.21 kg of heroin price over Rs 21,000 crore from Afghanistan to India.
Opposing his bail plea of Harpreet Singh Talwar alias Kabir Talwar, a Delhi resident, the NIA had mentioned the narcotics was trafficked to India “disguised as authorized imports within the type of “semi-processed talc stones and bituminous coal” and “the proceeds… despatched again to the consigners, who used these funds for funding terrorist actions of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT)”. It mentioned that “the narco-traffickers have been situated in Afghanistan and have been sending heroin through Iran and Pakistan to India (with assist of ISI & Iranian center males)”.
In September 2021, the DRI had intercepted the heroin consignment at Mundra port and NIA took over the probe. As per the investigators, a complete of 6 consignments have been imported in India, despatched by the identical consigners from Afghanistan. The one intercepted at Mundra was the sixth consignment. Talwar was arrested by NIA in August 2022.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Ok Singh mentioned that “the appellant faces severe costs, which allegedly carry grave societal ramifications, together with the facilitation of cross-border drug trafficking… The dimensions and class of the operation, involving international syndicates, shell companies, medical visas, and false documentation, elevates this case far past routine NDPS violations”.
The bench, nonetheless, mentioned that “at this stage, it might be untimely and speculative to increase the allegations in opposition to the appellant to the area of terror financing”. “Whereas the prosecution has invoked provisions of UAPA and has broadly linked the smuggling enterprise to trans-national syndicates with suspected affiliations, there isn’t any compelling motive to at the moment hyperlink the appellant and proscribed terrorist organisations, both inside or outdoors the nation. The evidentiary basis to maintain such a grave allegation should be clear and compelling — one thing that may be seen solely after a considerable portion of proof is led by each the events,” it mentioned.
The bench additionally took word that “a number of key witnesses nonetheless stay to be examined, and the trial whereas underway, will take time in completion. Out of 24 most susceptible or materials witnesses, two have died, and two others are untraceable. One of many deceased witnesses, a retired customs officer, was discovered useless on the very day he was scheduled to file his assertion beneath Part 164 CrPC. The danger of witness tampering or elimination — whether or not straight attributable to the appellant or not — is an actual and current concern that militates in opposition to the grant of bail at this stage.”
The SC additionally directed the particular courtroom to checklist the matter twice in a month and file statements of prosecution witnesses.
Story continues under this advert
The courtroom gave Talwar liberty to resume his bail prayer after six months or upon substantial development within the trial, whichever is earlier. It additionally requested the NIA to undergo the particular courtroom a further checklist of witnesses who, in its evaluation, are delicate, or materials, inasmuch as their testimony might have a direct bearing on the function of the accused or different co-accused within the ongoing trial and probe.
© The Indian Specific Pvt Ltd