2025:BHC-AUG:17320-DB

{1} APEAL-357-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 358 OF 2025

1. Sayyad Faisal Sayyad Khaleel

Age- 29 years, Occ. Business,
R/o. Mehmoodpura, Rozabaugh,
Aurangabad, Tal & Dist. Aurangabad.

2. Abdul Hadi s/o Abdul Rauf Momin

Age -33, Occ. Driver,
R/o. Varun Apartment, Rehman Ganj,
In front of Jawahar Garden Jalna,
Tal & Dist. Jalna. ….APPELLANTS
[Orig. Accused No. 2 and 4]

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra …..RESPONDENT

…..
Mr. N.R. Shaikh, Advocate for appellants
Mrs. Kalpalata Patil Bharaswadkar, APP for State
…..

WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 357 OF 2025
Shaikh Irfan Shaikh Salim Alias Irfan Milli
Age-40 years, Occ. Urdi Tuitions,
R/o.Makka Masjid Kiradpura, Aurangabad
(Presently incarcerated Aurangabad
Central Prison, for last 2 years) ...APPELLANT
[Orig. Accused No. 1]

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra .....RESPONDENT

…..
Mr. Javed R. Shaih and Mr. N.R. Shaikh, Advocate for Appellant
Mrs. Kalpalata Patil Bharaswadkar, APP for State
.......

Bhagyawant Punde
 {2} APEAL-357-2025

CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND

SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, JJ.

RESERVED ON: 18th JUNE, 2025

PRONOUNCED ON: 07th JULY, 2025

ORDER : [PER NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.]

1. By these appeals filed under Section 21 of National

Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (“NIA Act” for short), appellants

challenge common order passed below Exhibits- 12,13 and 14 in

Special Case No. 58/2023 by learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Aurangabad, thereby refusing bail to them.

2. On 21.09.2022 FIR is lodged by Rahul Rode,

Assistant Police Inspector, Anti Terrorism Squad, Aurangabad

alleging that, a secret information was received that on

23.11.2021 near Jama Masjid of Chikalthana, training of karate

was arranged for Muslim youths. At that place a banner i.e.

“Healthy People Healthy Nation” was displayed. In the said

program, Secretary Mohsin Nadvi of Popular Front of India

Organization (“PFI” for short) has given a speech propagating

that Muslims in India are subjected to mob lynching and Central

Government is attacking Muslim people through Hindu

organizations in different States. The coming period is difficult

for Muslims. Therefore, PFI is working for making Muslim youths

Bhagyawant Punde
 {3} APEAL-357-2025

physically capable. Similar program was held by PFI on

27.11.2021 at Samosa Ground, Katkat Gate, Aurangabad. In the

said program, District President of PFI Irfan Milli and General

Secretary Saber were present. They stated in their speeches that

present period is difficult for Muslim community. Indian

Government is daily conspiring against Muslims. Therefore with a

view to resist the Indian Government with arms they are

conducting camps. Therefore, Muslim youths should become

members of PFI on large scale.

3. As per the secret information received from the

sources on 3rd and 4th July, 2022, PFI had arranged arms and

physical training at a hall in front of Masjid-a-Mansab Mir at

Naregaon. In the said workshop District President of PFI Imran

Shaha and other followers of PFI were present. Except limited

trainees nobody else was allowed there. It was learnt that in the

said workshop Muslim youths were trained and encouraged to

fight against Indian Government with arms and might to protect

Muslim religion. It is also learnt that Managing Committee

members of PFI namely Sayyad Faisal Sayyad Khaleel resident of

Aurangabad and Abdul Hadi, resident of Jalna (appellants in

Appeal No. 358/2025) and Parvez Khan, resident of Aurangabad

Bhagyawant Punde
 {4} APEAL-357-2025

gave hate speeches propagating that Central Government is

implementing CAA, NRC, Hijab Ban, Triple Talaq Ban, which are

against Muslim religion. They make statement which create

unrest, discontent and incite the mob. They call upon Muslim

people to fight with arms and to commit Jihad.

4. On 14.08.2022 a get together of Ulema was held

under the campaign “Save The Republic”. In that program

Maulana Irfan Milli and Maulana Nasir Nadvi were present. In the

said program speeches were given creating discontent and

disaffection against the Central Government. A fake narrative

was propagated that through NRC Muslim community is being

harassed and by the violent action 20 Lakh Muslim community

people are tried to be killed. It is also learnt that they are

expressing their intention to establish new Government on the

basis of Sharia law and for that purpose they are encouraging

Muslim youths to store arms and if necessary aid can be taken

from other countries.

5. The FIR is registered at ATS, Kalachowki Police

Station, Mumbai for offences punishable under Sections 13(1)

(b) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (“UAPA” for

short), under Sections 121A, 153A, 120B, 109, 116, 201 of IPC

Bhagyawant Punde
 {5} APEAL-357-2025

and Section 4 read with 25 of Arms Act and under Section 135 of

Maharashtra Police Act.

6. Pursuant to the registration of crime appellants came

to be arrested on 22.09.2022. During the course of investigation

material connecting ISIS was allegedly found with appellants.

Document namely “India 2047 towards rule of Islam in India,

internal Document not for circulation” was also found with

appellant- Sayyad Faisal . So also one book in Urdu language by

name “Babri Masjid Kahi Hum Bhul Na Jaye” was found.

7. On completion of investigation charge sheet came to

be filed by prosecution in the month of February-2023 under

Sections 121A, 122, 153A, 120B, 109, 116, 201 of IPC, Section

13(1)(b) of UAPA, Section 4 read with 25 of Arms Act and under

Section 135 of Maharashtra Police Act. Appellant Shaikh Irfan

Shaikh Salim Alias Irfan Milli is arrayed as Accused No. 1 and

Appellants- Sayyad Faisal Sayyad Khaleel and Abdul Hadi Abdul

Rauf Momin are arrayed as Accused No. 2 and 4 in the charge

sheet. The case is numbered as Special Case No. 58 of 2023.

8. Appellants preferred applications Exhibits-12, 13

and 14, for bail, which are rejected by the Trial Court. Hence, the

present appeal.

Bhagyawant Punde
 {6} APEAL-357-2025

9. Heard learned advocates for the accused and learned

APP for State.

10. Learned advocate Mr. N.R. Shaikh, for appellants in

Criminal Appeal No. 358/2025 by relying on the order of granting

bail to Shaikh Umer (co-accused in the present crime) by the

Apex Court submits that on the ground of parity, accused are

entitled for bail.

11. On merit, he submits that FIR is lodged on

21.09.2022 and appellants are arrested on 22.09.2022, whereas

PFI was declared as unlawful organization on 27.09.2022. So

when the FIR was lodged PFI was not unlawful organization and

hence no offence can be said to have been committed by the

appellants. He submits that from the appellants Hard disk and

cell phone, some literature was seized. Nothing incriminating

was found with the appellants. He submits that, there is no

material to show that there was any physical act of terrorism or

overt act of violence at the time of conducting programs or

thereafter. He submits that act of teaching karate is not an act of

terrorism within the definition of UAPA. According to him, though

amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- was found in the account of the

accused, the same is not used for any terrorist activity. By

Bhagyawant Punde
 {7} APEAL-357-2025

relying on the Division Bench decision at Nagpur in Mahesh

Kariman Tirki and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra 1, he submits that,

Section 43E of UAPA deals with recovery of arms or explosive or

any other substance specified in Section 15 recovered from the

appellants and used in the commission of terrorist Act. In terms

of Section 15 UAPA seizure must be of some article used to

create violence resulting in death, injury, damage, destruction

etc. According to him unless there is seizure of bomb, explosive

etc., sub clause (a) of Section 43E of UAPA has no application at

all.

By relying on Mahesh Tirki (supra), Vernon vs The

State of Maharashtra & Another 2 and Barkathullah v. Union of

India3, he submits that mere recovery of literature in absence of

allegation of overt act of violence and mere participation in

seminars does not attract offences under UAPA. By relying on

Devangana Kalita v. State of Delhi NCT 4, he submits that, right

to protest against Government is a fundamental right. Even if

inflammatory speeches are given, that does not amount to

terrorist act. He further submits that even if allegations of

prosecution are taken as it is at the most appellants can be said

1 AIROnline 2024 BOM 498

2 Criminal Appeal No. 639 of 2023
3 AIR Online 2023 MAD 1679
4 AIROnline 2021 Del 837

Bhagyawant Punde
 {8} APEAL-357-2025

to have committed offences punishable under the provisions of

IPC and Arms Act, for which two years and three years

imprisonment is provided. Appellants have already undergone

more than two years imprisonment. Though, the Trial has

commenced, out of 145 witnesses cited by the prosecution, only

five witnesses are examined so far. Therefore, there is no

likelihood of trial concluding in near future. Therefore, by relying

on Jahir Hak v. State of Rajasthan5, Athar Parwez vs. Union of

India6, he submits that accused are entitled to be released on

bail.

12. Learned advocate Mr. Javed R. Shaikh for appellant-

Shaikh Irfan Shaikh Salim Alias Irfan Milli adopted the

arguments of appellants Sayyad Faisal and Abdul Hadi. In

addition, he submits that from appellant- Irfam Milli 7 inch knife,

fighter, Rampuri knife and 1½ ft. sword were recovered. It

cannot be said that these arms were used by appellant for

toppling the Government. He submits that at the most offence

under Arms Act can be said to be made out against appellant

which is punishable with two years imprisonment. Appellant-

Irfan Milli is in jail since two years and eight months and since

5 AIROnline 2022 SC 501

6 2024 INSC 995

Bhagyawant Punde
 {9} APEAL-357-2025

trial is not likely to conclude in near future he may be released

on bail.

13. By referring to definition of terrorist acts he submits

that there is no material on record to show that appellant has

indulged in any terrorist act. Therefore by relying on order

passed in favour of co-accused Shaikh Umer he prays for

releasing the appellant on bail. In support of his submissions he

relied on Jalaluddin Khan v. Union of India 7, Javed Gulam Nabi

Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra and Others 8, Union of India vs.

K.A. Najeeb9, Mohd. Muslim alias Hussain vs. State (NCT of

Delhi)10 and Javed Ahmad Hajam vs. State of Maharashtra &

Anr.11.

14. Per contra, learned APP strenuously opposed the

appeals. She submits that appellants are involved in unlawful

activity against the State. National security is of foremost

important. PFI is radical organization which was indulging in

seditious activity. They were taking secret meetings. Material

seized from appellant Sayyad Faisal Sayyad Khaleel shows about

mission of 2047. She submits that appellants are main accused.

7 AIRONline 2024 SC 542

8 (2024) 9 SCC 813
9 2021 3 SCC 713
10 2023 SCC OnLne SC 352
11 2024 (4) SCC 156

Bhagyawant Punde
 {10} APEAL-357-2025

The case of Shaikh Umer is distinguishable from the case of

present appellants as he was not named in the FIR and his name

was subsequently added as accused in the charge sheet. These

appellants arranged meetings and events, whereas Shaikh Umer

only asked people to attend events and raised slogans in the

events. She submits that appellants are responsible for delay in

framing of the charge. So far as five witnesses are examined and

trial is being conducted on day-to-day basis. If the accused are

released on bail they will tamper the prosecution evidence. She

therefore submits that appellants are not entitled for bail. In

support of her submissions she relied on Union of India rep. by

the Inspector of Police National Investigation Agency Chennai

Branch vs. Barakathullah etc12.

15. Heard learned advocates for appellants and learned

APP for State at length. Perused the record.

16. Admittedly, when the FIR was lodged on 21.09.2022

and appellants were arrested on 22.09.2022, PFI which was a

registered organization was not banned. It was banned for a

period of five years by Government of India by Gazette

Notification dated 28.09.2022.

12 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1019

Bhagyawant Punde
 {11} APEAL-357-2025

17. In Athar Parwez (supra) the Apex Court was

considering the case of active members of PFI for bail. In para

27 of this citation it is observed; “ in the chargesheet there is no

allegation that the Appellant was a member of a terrorist gang

or organisation. It is worth mentioning here that the PFI of

which the Appellant was a member has not been declared a

terrorist organisation within the meaning of Section 2(m) of the

UAPA, 1967. It was also found that the PFI is not mentioned as a

terrorist organisation in the first schedule of UAPA, 1967. The

chargesheet and the statement of witness ‘Z’ when seen as it is,

it would not be possible to record prima facie finding that

commission of offence under the UAPA, 1967 would be attracted

as there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the

accusations are prima facie correct.”

18. The aforesaid observations are squarely applicable to

the case of appellants as in the present case also when the FIR

was registered and appellants were arrested, PFI was not

declared a terrorist organization within the meaning of Section

2(m) of UAPA. So also PFI was not mentioned in the first

schedule of UAPA. Merely because appellants participated in the

meetings, seminars or physical training of karate etc., prima

Bhagyawant Punde
 {12} APEAL-357-2025

facie, it cannot be said that they have indulged in any terrorist

act.

In Athar Parwez (supra) also the document titled

“India 2047 towards rule of Islam in India, internal document not

for circulation” was found and prosecution alleged that appellant

along with other members of PFI aimed at disrupting sovereignty

of India and cause disaffection against the country. The Apex

Court thus in similar circumstances granted bail to Athar Parwez.

19. In Vernon (supra) the Apex Court has held that, “ as

regards the acts specified in Section 15(1)(b) thereof, some of

the literature alleged to have been recovered from the

appellants, by themselves give hint of propagation of such

activities. But there is nothing against the appellants to prima

facie establish that they had indulged in the activities which

would constitute overawing any public functionary by means of

criminal force or the show of criminal force or attempts by the

appellants to do so. Neither there is allegation against them of

causing death of any public functionary or attempt to cause

death of such functionary. Mere holding of certain literatures

through which violent acts may be propagated would not ipso

facto attract the provisions of Section 15(1)(b) of the said Act.

Bhagyawant Punde
 {13} APEAL-357-2025

Thus, prima facie, in our opinion, we cannot reasonably come to

a finding that any case against the appellants under Section

15(1) (b) of 1967 Act can be held to be true.”

It is further observed that, “witness statements do

not refer to any terrorist act alleged to have been committed by

the appellants. …….. Moreover, actual involvement of the

appellants in any terrorist act has not surfaced from any of the

material. ……. Mere participation in seminars by itself cannot

constitute an offence under the bail restricting Sections of the

UAPA, with which they have been charged.”

20. Coming to the facts of present case allegations

against appellants- Sayyad Faisal Sayyad Khaleel and Abdul Hadi

are that, they were present in the workshop dated 3 rd and 4th

July, 2022, wherein Muslim youths were trained and encouraged

to fight against Indian Government. They both gave hate

speeches propagating that Central Government is implementing

CAA, NRC, Hijab Ban, Triple Talaq Ban, which are against Muslim

religion and their statements create unrest, discontent and incite

the mob.

The appellants have conducted camps wherein

appellant- Sayyad Faisal Sayyad Khaleel has given

Bhagyawant Punde
 {14} APEAL-357-2025

demonstration of different weapons. Video clips found in the

mobile of appellant- Irfan Milli are allegedly anti national. Hate

speeches and mob lynching videos about Babri Masjid were also

found. 311 videos in one memory card and 1394 images were

found with appellant- Abdul Hadi.

Weapons like sword, rampuri knife, fighter were

recovered from appellant- Irfan Milli along with book against

judicial system and electronic gadgets.

Keeping in mind the observations of the Apex Court

in Vernon (supra) in absence of allegations of any overt act of

violation and terrorist activities, mere participation in

seminars/camps, prima facie, would not amount to terrorist act.

Though, weapons are recovered from appellant-Irfan

Milli, it is not the case of prosecution that those were used for

any terrorist activity and/or for toppling the Government.

21. Since the trial is in progress, we refrain from

commenting upon merits of the allegations levelled against the

appellants. Suffice it to say that, no material is brought to our

notice showing involvement of appellants in any terrorist activity.

22. On the ground of parity also the appellants are

entitled for bail as co-accused in the present crime Shaikh Umer

Bhagyawant Punde
 {15} APEAL-357-2025

is released on bail by the Apex Court. We do not find any merit

in the submission of learned APP that he was not named in the

FIR and was subsequently arrayed as accused. Fact remains that

he is arrayed as accused in the present crime along with other

accused persons and all the accused are charged under Sections

121A, 122, 153A, 120B, 109, 116, 201 of IPC, under Section

13(1)(b) of UAPA and Section 4 read with 25 of Arms Act and

under Section 135 of Maharashtra Police Act.

23. In Barakathullah (supra), Apex Court held;

“ 22. In the instant case, we are satisfied from the

chargesheet as also the other material/documents
relied upon by the appellant that there are
reasonable grounds for believing that the
accusations against the respondents are prima
facie true and that the mandate contained in the
proviso to Section 43(D)(5) would be applicable for
not releasing the respondents on bail. Having
regard to the seriousness and gravity of the
alleged offences, previous criminal history of the
respondents as mentioned in the charge-sheet, the
period of custody undergone by the respondents
being hardly one and half years, the severity of
punishment prescribed for the alleged offences and
prima facie material collected during the course of
investigation, the impugned order passed by the
High Court cannot be sustained. We are conscious
of the legal position that we should be slow in
interfering with the order when the bail has been
granted by the High Court, however it is equally
well settled that if such order of granting bail is

Bhagyawant Punde
 {16} APEAL-357-2025

found to be illegal and perverse, it must be set

aside.

23. This Court has often interpreted the counter

terrorism enactments to strike a balance between
the civil liberties of the accused, human rights of
the victims and compelling interest of the state. It
cannot be denied that National security is always of
paramount importance and any act in aid to any
terrorist act – violent or non-violent is liable to be
restricted. The UAPA is one of such Acts which has
been enacted to provide for effective prevention of
certain unlawful activities of individuals and
associations, and to deal with terrorist activities, as
also to impose reasonable restrictions on the civil
liberties of the persons in the interest of
sovereignty and integrity of India.”

In the present case, prima facie, we do not find

reasonable grounds for believing that accusations against the

accused are true. Therefore, mandate contained in proviso to

Section 43(D)(5) would not be applicable to the case of accused.

The prosecution could not point out criminal antecedents of

appellants. Section 13(1)(b) prescribes maximum punishment of

7 years, out of which appellants have already undergone 2 years

and 8 months imprisonment.

24. Taking into consideration the fact that there are total

145 witnesses cited by the prosecution and though trial is being

conducted on day to day basis, so far only five witnesses are

Bhagyawant Punde
 {17} APEAL-357-2025

examined and accused are in jail since more than two years and

eight months, there appears no likelihood of trial being

concluded in the near future. In National Investigation Agency v.

Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali 13, the Apex Court has held that,

“Long incarceration and unlikely likelihood of trial being

completed in near future has also been taken as a ground for

exercising its constitutional role by the Constitutional Courts to

grant bail on violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India

which guarantees trial to be concluded within a reasonable

time.”

On this ground also, appellants are entitled for bail.

25. In the light of the aforesaid, we are inclined to allow

the appeals.

26. The appeals are allowed with a direction that

appellants be released on bail on appropriate terms and

conditions to be fixed by the Special Court.

27. The appellants shall surrender their passports, if any,

and shall attend the Special Court on each and every date fixed

and shall co-operate with the Special Court for early disposal of

the case.

13 (2019) 5 SCC 1

Bhagyawant Punde
 {18} APEAL-357-2025

28. The appellants shall be produced before the Special

Court on 10th July, 2025.

29. The Special Court shall enlarge the appellants on bail

on appropriate stringent terms and conditions including the

conditions mentioned above. Learned APP shall be heard on the

terms and conditions.

(SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J.) (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)

Bhagyawant Punde