In a significant observation to convey the message, Supreme Court on Monday remarked during the hearing that pelting of stones in Jammu and Kashmir is not a very ordinary action, while asking Kashmiri separatist leader Shabir Ahmed Shah to approach the NC government for obtaining his detention order.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Nath granted the NIA three weeks to respond to Shah’s fresh affidavit after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta pointed out newly mentioned facts and stressed his links with Pakistan-based terror networks.Senior advocate Collin Gonsalves, appearing for Shah, submitted that his family was not given the detention order and he seeks series of detention orders passed since 1970.Mehta opposed the submission and said the issue was not raised before the Delhi High Court.
“You ask the government to provide you the details. Why ask in bail proceedings? It’s over a 50 years,” the bench observed. Gonsalves argued that Shah has been in jail for 39 years on a common charge namely speeches followed by stone pelting.Justice Mehta then said, “Pelting of stones in this state is not a very ordinary action.” The top court had earlier refused to grant interim bail to Shah in a terror funding case.It however, issued notice to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) seeking its response within two weeks on Shah’s plea challenging the Delhi High Court’s June 12 order denying him bail in the case.
The high court had refused to grant him bail in the case, observing the possibility of him carrying out similar unlawful activities and influencing witnesses couldn’t be ruled out.Shah was arrested by the NIA on June 4, 2019. In 2017, the NIA registered a case against 12 persons on allegations of conspiracy for raising and collecting funds for causing disruption by way of pelting stones, damaging public property and conspiring to wage war against the Government of India.
Shah was alleged to have played a “substantial role” in facilitating a separatist or militant movement in Jammu and Kashmir by inciting and instigating the general public to sloganeering in support of the secession of J-K; paying tribute to the family of slain terrorists or militants by eulogising them as “martyrs”; receiving money through hawala transactions and raising funds through LoC trade, which were allegedly used to fuel subversive and militant activities in J-K.
The high court had said the Constitution provides for a right to freedom of speech and expression, but it also places reasonable restrictions such as public order, decency, morality or incitement to an offence.
Follow us
