Delhi High Court rejects NIA’s preliminary objection to maintainability of plea challenging arrest of UNLF (P) cadres

Based connected a July 19, 2023, FIR, NIA arrested the self-styled service main of the organisation Thokchom Shyamjai Singh, its quality serviceman Laimayum Anand Sharma, and a operator Salam Ibomcha Meitei connected March 13. The 3 are facing charges nether the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for transgression conspiracy and waging warfare against the state, arsenic good arsenic for offences nether the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

NIA has alleged that the 3 are progressive successful raising funds for UNLF done extortion, arsenic good arsenic recruiting cadres and procuring weapons to incite unit successful Manipur. Notably, the national government, Manipur authorities authorities and the UNLF(P) had signed a tripartite bid accord successful November 2023.

A habeas corpus petition was moved pursuing their arrest, besides seeking the mounting speech of their arrest, but the plea was subsequently withdrawn from earlier the Delhi High Court connected April 16, with the tribunal granting liberty to the petitioners to determination the aforesaid issues earlier the competent court.

The contiguous plea challenges their apprehension arsenic good arsenic their remand arsenic illegal. The petitioners person contended that their apprehension violates their cardinal rights guaranteed nether Articles 14, 21, and 22 of the Constitution. The petitioners, represented by advocator Siddhartha Borgohain, person besides pointed retired that “grounds of arrest‟ ought to person been communicated to them successful penning astatine the clip of their arrest.

NIA, represented by Rahul Tyagi, opposing the maintainability of their plea, had submitted that the petitioners could not person moved Delhi HC but alternatively could person either moved the Supreme Court with a writ petition oregon challenged their remand orders earlier the NIA peculiar court.

Rejecting the NIA’s contention, Justice Anup Bhambhani concluded, “It truthful does not basal to crushed wherefore the words “before Competent Court/Forum” appearing successful bid dated 16.04.2024 would, for immoderate conceivable reason, exclude a Bench dealing with a antithetic subject-matter allocation, adjacent if the antithetic Bench exercises powers nether the aforesaid Article 226 of the Constitution…what is applicable is that the Bench earlier which the petition is filed indispensable beryllium competent to woody with that taxable matter.”

Holding the petition to beryllium maintainable, Justice Bhambhani went connected to record, “All other apart, this tribunal is of the presumption that successful matters concerning questions of idiosyncratic liberty, it would ne'er beryllium conscionable oregon due to cull a plea based connected a pedantic, hyper-technical oregon restrictive operation of bid dated 16.04.2024 made by the Division Bench, particularly erstwhile that bid expressly grants to the petitioners liberty to agitate the aforesaid issues earlier the competent tribunal oregon forum.”