Conspired To Transform India Into Islamic Country By 2047: Bombay HC Denies Bail To 3 PFI Members
The Bombay High Court denied bail to three members of PFI (Popular Front of India), a banned organisation, saying that they conspired to transform India into an Islamic country by the year 2047.
The accused PFI members filed appeals, seeking bail under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) for the offences under Sections 121-A, 153-A, 120-B, 109, 116, and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and under Section 13(1)(b) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA).
A Division Bench comprising Justice A.S. Gadkari and Justice Shyam C. Chandak observed, “Record of investigation indicates that, the Appellants in connivance with other Accused persons conspired to overawe the Government by use of criminal force. The first information report is self-eloquent. There is more than sufficient material available on record in the form of statements of witnesses and the documents seized from the electronic devices of the Accused persons that, they indulged into activity of inciting like minded people to join them to overawe the Government by use of criminal force. They also conspired to transform India into an Islamic country by 2047. They are not only propagators but actively intending to implement the Vision-2047 document of their organization.”
The Bench said that there is more than sufficient evidence on record to corroborate the allegations against the accused persons.
Senior Advocates Ashok Mundargi, Mihir Desai, and Advocate Hasnain Kazi represented the appellants while APP Ashvini A. Takalkar represented the respondents.
Brief Facts -
An FIR was filed in September 2022 and it was the prosecution case that in June 2022, an inaugural ceremony of the new office of PFI took place. At the said occasion, the accused no. 1 and other 15-20 persons were present. When the opening ceremony was over, a secrete meeting of PFI members was convened and in the said meeting, the accused persons highlighted various atrocities being committed against the Muslim community in India, including the incidents of mob-lynching. It was emphasized therein that there was a need of unity of Muslim community to wage a war against the country by adopting any mode. The accused no. 1 was the head of PFI and instigated the persons present in the meeting to motivate people from Muslim community with similar thinking, to enhance communication with like-minded persons from the community to create atmosphere against the Indian Government.
The PFI head also issued a ‘Fatwa’ and told to kill any person who would speak against the Muslim religion. He and other accused persons instigated the Muslim community to have hatred against the people of other religions so as to cause disturbance in the country. The accused persons, thus, indulged into the conspiracy to do such acts against the Government. They conspired to wage war against the county and as a result, a crime was registered against them. The appellants namely Razi Ahmed Khan (accused no. 3), Kayyum Abdul Shaikh (accused no. 2), and Unais Umar Khaiyyam Patel (accused no. 6), preferred bail applications before the Trial Court but the same were turned down. Hence, they approached the High Court.
The High Court in view of the above facts noted, “At the outset it may be noted that, the Appellants have been charged with Section 13(1)(b) of UAP Act which forms part of Chapter III of the said Act and therefore the rigors of Section 43-D(5) of the said Act are not applicable to it. Even otherwise, the maximum sentence prescribed under the said Section may extent to seven years with fine.”
The Court further noted that there are statements of more than 20 witnesses, multiple conversations between members of the Association inter-se and overwhelming electronic evidence to demonstrate that, the appellants in connivance with other accused persons have systematically undertaken activities which are detrimental to the interest and integrity of the nation.
“There is more than sufficient material available on record to prima facie show the involvement of the Appellants in the present crime to apply Section 121-A of the IPC. The evidence alleged against the Appellants is serious in nature. Even if no overt act or violations has been carried out till today, the material on record clearly indicates that prima facie evidence of conspiracy to commit offence/s punishable under Section 121 of the IPC is made out”, it said.
The Court also took note of the fact that the appellants participated in spreading hatred against the State, spread anti national agenda through various means of propaganda including use of electronic media by creating WhatsApp groups and circulating messages detrimental to the interest of the nation. It added that the appellants shared a document by name Vision-2047 and the same was propounded by the PFI which the appellants are professing.
“Perusal of material/evidence on record clearly indicates that, the Appellants entered into a wide spread conspiracy to give ultimate effect to the Vision-2047 document. The roles of Appellants are interconnected and inseparable as far as the allegation of conspiracy under Section 121-A of IPC is concerned. Perusal of Vision-2047 document indicates that, it is a sinister plot and design to transform India into an Islamic State by adopting all possible methods mentioned therein. It is a conspiracy to commit horrendous acts perpetrated by the Appellants pursuant to their conspiracy, amounts to conspire to overawe or to attempt to wage war against the Government of India”, it remarked.
The Court observed that the PFI is a cadre-based organization and each cadre is entrusted with special duty and responsibility and therefore, the appellants have been given specific specialised duties to further the conspiracy.
“The allegations against the Appellants are well founded and cannot be brushed aside or ignored. After taking into consideration the entire material available on record, we are of the opinion that, a strong prima facie case is made out to indict the Appellants in the present crime. If the Appellants are released on bail, there is every possibility that, they may tamper with the evidence at this crucial stage”, it concluded.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the appeals of the appellants for releasing them on bail.
Cause Title- Razi Ahmed Khan v. The State of Maharashtra (Neutral Citation: 2024:BHC-AS:22883-DB)
Appearance:
Appellants: Senior Advocates Ashok Mundargi, Mihir Desai, Advocates Hasnain Kazi, Pravada Raut, Shraddha Vavhal, Saipan Shaikh, Hafizuddin Kazi, Zeeshan Khan, Athar Qureshi, and Raeed Kazi.
Respondents: APP Ashwini A. Takalkar
