New Delhi, July 29, 2026 (Yes Punjab News)
The Supreme Court has granted bail to two alleged members of the Indian Mujahideen’s Rajasthan module in a terror case investigated by the Delhi Police Special Cell, citing prolonged incarceration and the slow pace of the trial as a violation of their fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta ordered the release of Mohd. Saquib Ansari and Waqar Azhar on bail in connection with an FIR registered by the Special Cell in New Delhi. The release will be subject to conditions imposed by the trial court, provided the accused are not required in any other case.
The two accused have been in custody since 2014 and are facing charges under provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), Indian Penal Code, Explosive Substances Act, Arms Act and Passports Act.
The prosecution case relates to the alleged Rajasthan module of the Indian Mujahideen. Investigating agencies claimed that the module came to light following the arrest of Pakistani national Mohd. Qateel Siddiqui in November 2011, who allegedly disclosed details about plans to carry out terror activities in and around Delhi.
Based on the investigation, authorities claimed that explosives and materials allegedly linked to the preparation of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) were recovered, leading to cases registered by the Rajasthan ATS/SOG and the Delhi Police Special Cell.
While hearing the bail pleas, the Supreme Court noted that the accused had already received relief in the Rajasthan cases. Their conviction in one case has been stayed by the Rajasthan High Court through suspension of sentence, while bail has also been granted in another pending matter.
The apex court observed that the Delhi case was the only matter keeping the accused behind bars. It noted that the prosecution had proposed examining 197 witnesses, but the trial had progressed at a very slow pace.
“From January, 2025 till date, only two witnesses have been examined, one of whom has been examined only in part. The progress of the trial has been extremely slow, and there appears to be no prospect of the trial being concluded in the near future,” the bench said in its order.
The court held that continued detention in such circumstances could not be justified and observed that the prolonged incarceration, along with the delay in trial proceedings, amounted to a violation of the right to liberty guaranteed under Article 21.
However, the bench clarified that it had not examined the merits of the allegations against the accused and that its observations were limited only to the consideration of their bail applications.
The Supreme Court directed the accused to cooperate with the trial proceedings and warned that any attempt to delay the trial, non-cooperation or misuse of bail could allow the prosecution to seek appropriate relief.
FOLLOW NOW
