Merely because appellant had threatened the person stating that he was associated with an ISIS terrorist, it would by itself not be a reasonable ground to hold that he had supported a terrorist organization

ASE LAW

Mohamed Irfan Vs. Union of India represented by The Inspector of Police, National Investigation Agency, Chennai

Criminal Appeal No.340 of 2023 [2023 (2) L.W. (Crl.) 877]  

Date of Judgment: 09.11.2023

�I.P.C., Sections 148, 506(ii), grant of bail - Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, Sections 13, 38, 39 - Arms Act,1959, Section 28:- Allegation against appellant that he had committed offence under section 18 of the UA (P) Act by conspiring to commit a terrorist act and also under section 39, relating to support given to a terrorist organization. Merely because appellant had threatened the person stating that he was associated with an ISIS terrorist, it would by itself not be a reasonable ground to hold that he had supported a terrorist organization.  Further, the fact that appellant handled the funds of A1 cannot be the basis to infer his support to any terrorist organization.Allegation of conspiracy to commit a terrorist Act must spell out the object of the conspiracy (i.e) as to what exactly was the terrorist Act that was agreed to be committed.