UAPA Case Lawyer in Delhi / india
UAPA Act to provide for the more effective prevention of certain unlawful activities of individuals and associations, and for dealing with terrorist activities, and for matters connected therewith.
Its principal goal is to give authorities the power to deal with acts that threaten India’s integrity and sovereignty. The UAPA, 1967 was enacted to make it easier to prevent certain illegal activities by persons and organizations, as well as matters related to them. The statute stems from a recommendation made by a committee created by the National Integration Council to look into the subject of ‘national integration and regionalization’ in order to impose ‘appropriate constraints.’ The Constitution (16th Amendment) Act of 1963 was passed in response to the committee’s findings, imposing reasonable restrictions on the exercise of some fundamental rights, including Freedom of Speech and Expression, Right to assembly peacefully, Right to form associations and unions.
Now question arises what constitutes “unlawful activity” and “unlawful association”: The Act defines unlawful activities as- in relation to an individual or association, means any action taken by such individual or association (whether by committing an act or by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representation or otherwise),—
Forfeiture of proceeds of terrorism or any property intended to be used for terrorism prescribed in Chapter V of the UAPA, 1967 deals with forfeiture of proceeds of terrorism or any property intended to be used for terrorism. The authority to carry out forfeiture of any proceeds is vested on the Central Government as laid down under Section 24A of the 1967 Act. The detailed list of sections and their contents have been briefly stated hereunder:
Raising funds for a terrorist organisation is an offence under Section 40 of the UAPA: A person is said to have committed the offence of raising funds for a terrorist organisation, who, with the intention of furthering the activity of a terrorist organisation has invited another to provide money, or receive money or other property, or provide money for the purpose of terrorism.
PROVISION OF BAIL IN UAPA (SECTION 43):
Provision of 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure is not applicable in the offices committed under any provision of UAPA.
In regular bail, there is a provision of reverse burden of proof under UAPA. Section 43(5) reads as under:
“Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code, no person accused of an offence punishable under Chapters IV and VI of this Act shall, if in custody, be released on bail or on his own bond unless the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity of being heard on the application for such release:
Provided that such accused person shall not be released on bail or on his own bond if the Court, on a perusal of the case diary or the report made under section 173 of the Code is of the opinion that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against such person is prima facie true”.
The restrictions on granting of bail specified in sub-section (5) is in addition to the restrictions under the Code or any other law for the time being in force on granting of bail.
Further, no bail is granted to a person accused of an offence punishable under this Act, if he is not an Indian citizen and has entered the country unauthorisedly or illegally except in very exceptional circumstances and for reasons to be recorded in writing. [Section 43(7)]
Its principal goal is to give authorities the power to deal with acts that threaten India’s integrity and sovereignty. The UAPA, 1967 was enacted to make it easier to prevent certain illegal activities by persons and organizations, as well as matters related to them. The statute stems from a recommendation made by a committee created by the National Integration Council to look into the subject of ‘national integration and regionalization’ in order to impose ‘appropriate constraints.’ The Constitution (16th Amendment) Act of 1963 was passed in response to the committee’s findings, imposing reasonable restrictions on the exercise of some fundamental rights, including Freedom of Speech and Expression, Right to assembly peacefully, Right to form associations and unions.
Now question arises what constitutes “unlawful activity” and “unlawful association”: The Act defines unlawful activities as- in relation to an individual or association, means any action taken by such individual or association (whether by committing an act or by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representation or otherwise),—
- which is intended, or supports any claim, to bring about, on any ground whatsoever, the cession of a part of the territory of India or the secession of a part of the territory of India from the Union, or which incites any individual or group of individuals to bring about such cession or secession; or
- (ii) which disclaims, questions, disrupts or is intended to disrupt the sovereignty and territorial integrity of India; or
- (iii) which causes or is intended to cause disaffection against India;
- (i) which has for its object any unlawful activity, or which encourages or aids persons to undertake any unlawful activity, or of which the members undertake such activity; or
- (ii) which has for its object any activity which is punishable under section 153A (45 of 1860) or section 153B of the Indian Penal Code, or which encourages or aids persons to undertake any such activity, or of which the members undertake any such activity:
Forfeiture of proceeds of terrorism or any property intended to be used for terrorism prescribed in Chapter V of the UAPA, 1967 deals with forfeiture of proceeds of terrorism or any property intended to be used for terrorism. The authority to carry out forfeiture of any proceeds is vested on the Central Government as laid down under Section 24A of the 1967 Act. The detailed list of sections and their contents have been briefly stated hereunder:
- Proceeds of terrorism (Section 24): The provision states that ‘proceeds of terrorism’ shall include any property intended to be used for terrorism.
- Powers of investigating officer and designated authority and appeal against an order of designated authority (Section 25): Any kind of representation of proceeds of terrorism if presumed by investigating and officer and designated authority, can be seized provided prior approval in writing of the Director-General of the Police of the state in which such property is situated, is taken.
- Court to order forfeiture of proceeds of terrorism (Section 26): In cases where the property is seized or attached on the grounds that it is the proceeds of terrorism and the court upholds the decision in this respect, it may order forfeiture of such property.
- Issue of show cause notice before forfeiture of proceeds of terrorism (Section 27): The person from whom the property has been seized on grounds of the same being proceeds of terrorism, shall be served with a show cause notice before such action is carried out by designated authorities.
- Appeal (Section 28): Anyone who is not satisfied with a forfeiture order issued under Section 26 has one month from the date they received the order to file an appeal with the high court that has jurisdiction over the court that issued the order they are dissatisfied with.
- Order of forfeiture not to interfere with other punishment (Section 29): The court’s forfeiture order made pursuant to this Chapter shall not preclude the imposition of any other punishment that the person affected thus is subject to.
- Claims by a third party (Section 30): The designated authority before whom the property is delivered must conduct an investigation into any claim or objection that is made in response to the seizure or attachment of any property pursuant to Section 25 on the grounds that the property is not subject to seizure or attachment.
- Powers of Designated Authority (Section 31): The Designated Authority, working in accordance with the terms of this Chapter, shall have all the civil court’s authority necessary to conduct a thorough and impartial investigation into the problem at hand.
- Certain transfers to be null and void (Section 32): When a property mentioned in a Section 25’s order or Section 27’s notice is transferred by any means following the issuance of the order or notice, the transfer is disregarded for the purposes of the proceedings under this Chapter, and if the property is subsequently forfeited, the transfer is deemed to be void.
- Forfeiture of property of certain persons (Section 33): If a person is suspected of committing an offence under Chapter IV or Chapter VI, the court has the discretion to order that any or all of his properties, whether movable or immovable or both, be attached during the course of the case if they haven’t previously been attached under this Chapter.
- Company to transfer shares to government (Section 34): When a company’s shares are forfeited to the Central Government or the state government, depending on the circumstance, in accordance with this Chapter, the company is required to immediately designate the Central Government or the state government, depending on the circumstance, as the transferee of those shares.
Raising funds for a terrorist organisation is an offence under Section 40 of the UAPA: A person is said to have committed the offence of raising funds for a terrorist organisation, who, with the intention of furthering the activity of a terrorist organisation has invited another to provide money, or receive money or other property, or provide money for the purpose of terrorism.
PROVISION OF BAIL IN UAPA (SECTION 43):
Provision of 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure is not applicable in the offices committed under any provision of UAPA.
In regular bail, there is a provision of reverse burden of proof under UAPA. Section 43(5) reads as under:
“Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code, no person accused of an offence punishable under Chapters IV and VI of this Act shall, if in custody, be released on bail or on his own bond unless the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity of being heard on the application for such release:
Provided that such accused person shall not be released on bail or on his own bond if the Court, on a perusal of the case diary or the report made under section 173 of the Code is of the opinion that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against such person is prima facie true”.
The restrictions on granting of bail specified in sub-section (5) is in addition to the restrictions under the Code or any other law for the time being in force on granting of bail.
Further, no bail is granted to a person accused of an offence punishable under this Act, if he is not an Indian citizen and has entered the country unauthorisedly or illegally except in very exceptional circumstances and for reasons to be recorded in writing. [Section 43(7)]