Contemplating terrorist act for years is also an act of terrorism: Delhi HC | India News

NEW DELHI: Contemplating a terrorist act for years, even without carrying it out, constitutes a terrorist act, the Delhi high court has declared.
“The definition of ‘terrorist act’ under Section 15 of the UAPA clearly includes the expressions “with the intention of instilling terror”, by any other means of any nature that causes or may cause. “Such expression would not be linked only to an immediate terrorist act, but would include even acts that could be under contemplation for years and could come into force after several years,” the court said in its December 23 order.
A division bench was hearing an appeal against the conviction of an Al-Qaida member in the Indian subcontinent (AQIS) under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

HC: Offers to brainwash and recruit young people cannot be ignored

Prosecutors alleged that the AQIS member was responsible for sending people to Pakistan for weapons training. During his visit to Pakistan, the appellant met Lashkar-e-Taiba chief and Jamaat-ud-Dawah chief, wanted for his involvement in the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, the prosecution alleged. In 2015, the appellant visited Bengaluru and met a fellow convict and discussed the planning and objectives of AQIS. The appellant also made inflammatory speeches against the nation and propagated “jihad” in his speeches, the prosecution said.
Witnesses testified in court that he made provocative speeches to the effect that RSS, BJP and VHP were conspiring against Muslims and that Muslims should also unite.
The division bench of Justices Prathiba M Singh and Amit Sharma observed that Section 18 of the UAPA punishes preparation for terrorist acts even when a specific terrorist act has not been identified. “Planning to carry out terrorist acts could also extend over years and, under Section 18 of the UAPA, the law is intended to address such preparation for terrorist acts, even in cases where a specific terrorist act has not occurred. been identified,” he said.
The court added: “Furthermore, speeches given to brainwash innocent youth, along with attempts to recruit them to commit illegal acts against the country, cannot be completely eliminated on the basis that no specific terrorist act has been committed.” “.
The court noted that there was sufficient evidence to show and link the appellant with the main accused who obtained passports and visited Pakistan, stating that the appellant, along with the co-accused, is part of a wider network involved in giving inflammatory speeches and disseminating material. , having links with organizations based in Pakistan, recruiting people for terrorist acts and instigating hatred against India and its political leaders.
The court further highlighted that a terrorist act includes conspiracy with terrorist organizations and associated persons. “A close reading of the definition of ‘terrorist act’ under the UAPA shows that… it includes any act that is intended to threaten or is likely to threaten the unity, integrity, security or sovereignty of India. The definition is broad enough to include conspiracy with terrorist organizations and association with persons providing support to terrorist organizations,” the top court said.
Stating that specific covert acts are not necessary for conspiracy, and even secret and clandestine support for declared terrorist organizations would also be sufficient, the court noted that the evidence and testimony clearly revealed the appellant’s association with terrorist organizations for the commission of conspiracy to commit a crime. terrorist act.