Skip to content
Legal Research And Analysis

Legal Research And Analysis

Stay Connected! Stay Informed!

Primary Menu
  • ABOUT US
  • ADVISORY BOARD
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • JOURNAL of LEGAL RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS
  • Submission Guidelines
  • Campus Ambassadors
  • UGC NET (LAW) COACHING & GUIDANCE
  • OUR CERTIFICATE COURSES
    • Certificate Course on Environmental Law
    • CERTIFICATE COURSE ON WOMEN’S RIGHTS
    • LRA HUMAN RIGHTS
    • CERTIFICATE PROGRAM ON MENTAL HEALTH
    • Certificate Course on Legal Research
    • CERTIFICATE COURSE ON LABOUR LAWS
    • Certificate Course on Intellectual Property Rights
    • CERTIFICATE COURSE ON AI AND LAW
    • Online Certificate Course On Contract Drafting
    • Online Certificate Course on Legal Drafting
    • Certificate Course on Cyber Law
    • Certificate Course on Research Writing
  • CONTACT US
  • TERMS AND CONDITIONS
  • Home
  • Article
  • Simple Membership in an Unlawful organization is a violation of the UAPA: Supreme Court rejects precedents from 2011.
  • Article
  • Covering the Supreme Court of India

Simple Membership in an Unlawful organization is a violation of the UAPA: Supreme Court rejects precedents from 2011.

The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, sometimes known as UAPA, is a piece of anti-terrorism legislation in India. It was initially passed in 1967 and has since undergone numerous amendments. The UAPA offers a legal framework to deal with terrorist operations and their funding as well as to stop activities that endanger India's sovereignty, unity, and integrity.
Yash Pratap Singh 12:54 pm 4 min read
Simple membership in an unlawful organisation is a violation of the UAPA: Supreme Court rejects precedents from 2011

Simple membership in an unlawful organisation is a violation of the UAPA: Supreme Court rejects precedents from 2011

Simple membership in an unlawful organisation is a violation of the UAPA: Supreme Court rejects precedents from 2011
Source: Images; Picture; Representative image/ Sources LRA E ARCHIVES

Other Articles

Toggle
  • What is Unlawful Activities(Prevention) Act?
  • Landmark Judgement

What is Unlawful Activities(Prevention) Act?

The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, sometimes known as UAPA, is a piece of anti-terrorism legislation in India. It was initially passed in 1967 and has since undergone numerous amendments. The UAPA offers a legal framework to deal with terrorist operations and their funding as well as to stop activities that endanger India’s sovereignty, unity, and integrity.

The UAPA allows the Indian government to declare a group a terrorist organisation, at which time anyone connected to the group can be detained and charged. The Act also gives the government the right to declare an organisation illegal and take its assets. Furthermore permitted under the UAPA is the imprisonment of someone without charges for up to 180 days with the option of an extension.

Read moreIMPACT OF COVID-19 IN INDIA: AN AWFUL HISTORY STILL IN THE MAKING

The UAPA is criticised for frequently being used to silence dissent and target political opponents. They draw attention to the fact that the Act’s expansive definitions of “terrorism” and “unlawful activities” can be used to prosecute appropriate protest and dissent. Supporters counter that the UAPA is required to fight terrorism and safeguard national security.

Simple Membership in an Unlawful organization is a violation of the UAPA: Supreme Court rejects precedents from 2011.
Source: Newsclick

In a significant decision, the Supreme Court overturned its 2011 decisions that had held that, in the absence of overt acts of violence, merely being a member of a prohibited organisation did not automatically constitute a crime under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act of 1967 or the Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act.

Landmark Judgement

Justices MR Shah, CT Ravikumar, and Sanjay Karol ruled on an appeal by a two-judge panel, concluding that simply being a member of a proscribed organisation makes one guilty of a crime and liable to prosecution under the UAPA. In light of its two-judge rulings on membership in forbidden organisations in 2011, the bench ruled the following high court judgements to be unconstitutional and overturned them:

Read moreARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND ITS IMPACT ON JOBS AND SOCIETY

Arup Bhuyan vs State of Assam

Arup Bhuyan, a resident of Assam, was arrested under the Unlawful Activities PA in 2009 for alleged links with a banned terrorist organization. He challenged the constitutional validity of Sections 15 and 20 of the UAPA, which deal with the presumption of guilt and denial of bail to the accused.

Simple Membership in an Unlawful organization is a violation of the UAPA: Supreme Court rejects precedents from 2011.
Source: iPleaders

The Supreme Court, in its judgment, struck down the provision of presumption of guilt as violative of the principles of natural justice and the right to a fair trial. The Court held that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt and the burden of proof cannot be shifted to the accused.

The Court also held that the provision denying bail to the accused under certain circumstances was not unconstitutional. However, it held that the accused should have the right to approach the court for bail and the court should consider each case on its own merits.

The Arup Bhuyan case has had significant implications for the interpretation and application of the UAPA. It has provided important safeguards for the protection of the rights of the accused and has ensured that the burden of proof remains with the prosecution.

Indra Das vs State of Assam 

The Supreme Court, in its judgment, held that Section 20(8) of the UAPA violates the fundamental right against self-incrimination guaranteed under Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution. The Court held that a confession made to a police officer cannot be considered voluntary, as there is always a possibility of coercion or pressure being applied by the police.

The Court also held that the provision allowing a confession made to a judicial magistrate to be admissible as evidence, subject to certain conditions, was constitutional. The Court stated that a confession made to a judicial magistrate is more likely to be voluntary and free from coercion.

State of Kerala vs Raneef

Raneef, a resident of Kerala, was arrested by the police under the UAPA for alleged involvement in a conspiracy to carry out terrorist activities. The prosecution relied on certain intercepted telephone conversations between Raneef and others as evidence of his involvement in the conspiracy.

Raneef challenged the admissibility of the intercepted telephone conversations as evidence, arguing that they were obtained in violation of his right to privacy and the procedural safeguards under the Indian Telegraph Act. He also challenged the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the UAPA.

The Supreme Court, in its judgment, held that the intercepted telephone conversations were admissible as evidence, as they were obtained in accordance with the procedure established under the Indian Telegraph Act. The Court also upheld the constitutional validity of the relevant provisions of the UAPA.

The Court observed that the UAPA was a special legislation enacted to deal with terrorism and its funding and that the prosecution was not required to prove the actual commission of a terrorist act. It was sufficient to prove that the accused was a member of a terrorist organization and had participated in its activities.

Please follow and like us:
error
fb-share-icon
Tweet
fb-share-icon
Tags: Raneef Supreme court UAPA unlawful organziation

Continue Reading

Previous: DNA from Beethoven’s hair gives insight into fatal liver disease.
Next: Twitter’s Blue Tick Policy Update: How to retain your Blue Tick

Related Stories

OCEAN GATE TITAN: Legal Implication and Regulation for The Deep-sea exploration in International water. OCEAN GATE TITAN: Legal Implication and Regulation for The Deep-sea exploration in International water.
14 min read
  • Article
  • Research Paper

OCEAN GATE TITAN: Legal Implication and Regulation for The Deep-sea exploration in International water.

8:01 am
Drug laws in India and its implementation Drug laws in India and its implementation
9 min read
  • Article
  • Research Paper

Drug laws in India and its implementation

2:29 pm
Dalits And Human Rights: Overcoming Caste-Based Discrimination the-indian-education-system-explained
14 min read
  • Article
  • Human RIghts

Dalits And Human Rights: Overcoming Caste-Based Discrimination

2:17 pm

Categories

RECENT POSTS

  • “Aparajita Bill” Road to Justice, Challenges and Opportunities Implementing Women’s Protection Laws
  • G20 Leadership in Combating Climate Change: Challenges, Progress, and the Road Ahead
  • Locked Out and Left Behind: Examining Marginalization in Lucknow
  • Environmental Crimes and Legal Provisions
  • Cybercrime in Cross-Border Jurisdictions: Challenges and Solutions

Empirical Research

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsL2WcsDuRU

Sign up

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
June 2025
M T W T F S S
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30  
« May    

You may have missed

“Aparajita Bill” Road to Justice, Challenges and Opportunities Implementing Women’s Protection Laws Aparajita Bill” Road to Justice, Challenges and Opportunities Implementing Women’s Protection Laws.
17 min read
  • Journal of Legal Research and Analysis
  • Research Paper
  • Volume 2 Issue 1

“Aparajita Bill” Road to Justice, Challenges and Opportunities Implementing Women’s Protection Laws

11:55 pm
G20 Leadership in Combating Climate Change: Challenges, Progress, and the Road Ahead Climate Change
11 min read
  • Journal of Legal Research and Analysis
  • Research Paper
  • Volume 1 Issue 1

G20 Leadership in Combating Climate Change: Challenges, Progress, and the Road Ahead

11:00 pm
Locked Out and Left Behind: Examining Marginalization in Lucknow image 2
30 min read
  • Women's right

Locked Out and Left Behind: Examining Marginalization in Lucknow

8:09 am
Environmental Crimes and Legal Provisions image 27
15 min read
  • Journal of Legal Research and Analysis
  • Research Paper
  • Volume 2 Issue 1

Environmental Crimes and Legal Provisions

2:16 am

CONTACT DETAILS

JOURNAL OF LEGAL RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS

Publisher Details:


Publishing Body: JHA PRANAV KUMAR
Owner's Name: JHA PRANAV KUMAR
Address: NEAR SDO KOTHI, SAKARUGARH, SAHIBGANJ,
JHARKHAND, 816109.
Mail: jhapranav2020@gmail.com / info.lralegal@gmail.com

  • ABOUT US
  • ADVISORY BOARD
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • JOURNAL of LEGAL RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS
  • Submission Guidelines
  • Campus Ambassadors
  • UGC NET (LAW) COACHING & GUIDANCE
  • OUR CERTIFICATE COURSES
  • CONTACT US
  • TERMS AND CONDITIONS
LRA LEGAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED. ( CIN -U85499UP2024PTC207221). Registered as a Startup under Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DIPPT), Government of India . Copyright © All rights reserved. | MoreNews by AF themes.

Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy