Delhi Court Acquits Two Men After Seven Years Under UAPA

In a landmark decision, a Delhi court has acquitted two men who spent over seven years in prison under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case, raising significant doubts about the evidence presented, including the recovery of arms and the credibility of witnesses. This ruling highlights serious concerns regarding the handling of evidence and the integrity of the prosecution's claims. The case involved allegations of terrorism and connections to the Islamic State, but the court ultimately determined that the accused were not proven to be affiliated with the group. This acquittal marks a significant moment in the ongoing discussions about the application of anti-terror laws in India.

By Narendra Chaudhary Mar 20, 2026, 08:52 IST

Acquittal of Two Accused Under UAPA

In a significant ruling, a Delhi court has acquitted two individuals who had been imprisoned for over seven years under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA). The court determined that the prosecution did not substantiate its allegations against the accused, Jamsheed Zahoor Paul and Parvaiz Rashid.

Additional Sessions Judge Amit Bansal from Patiala House Courts expressed skepticism regarding the police's claims of recovering weapons from the accused, highlighting substantial doubts about the evidence presented.

Paul and Rashid faced charges related to conspiracy and membership in a terrorist organization, along with illegal possession of firearms. The initial report also implicated two others: Asif Nazir Dar, who passed away in 2018, and Adil Wani, who remains at large.

The prosecution alleged that the police had received intelligence about individuals from Jammu and Kashmir who were allegedly aligning with the terrorist group Islamic State and acquiring weapons from Uttar Pradesh.

On September 6, 2018, the police apprehended Paul and Rashid near Jama Masjid in Delhi, claiming to have seized a pistol and five live cartridges from each of them.

Additionally, the police asserted that the accused were in contact with other suspected Islamic State members and had received financial support for weapon procurement.

Throughout the trial, 23 witnesses were called, including law enforcement officials and forensic experts, while both Paul and Rashid maintained their innocence.

In its judgment, the court raised concerns about the presence of the FIR number on documents related to the arms seizure, suggesting that it either indicated premature registration of the FIR or manipulation of the documents, both of which cast doubt on the prosecution's credibility.

Judge Bansal also pointed out the absence of witnesses during the recovery of the firearms, which further undermined the prosecution's case.

Moreover, the court noted that mobile phones seized from the accused were left unsealed for nearly two months before forensic examination, raising suspicions of tampering with the evidence.

Ultimately, the court concluded that the prosecution failed to establish that Paul and Rashid were affiliated with the Islamic State, leading to their acquittal.