• Delhi Lt Governor V.K. Saxena has accorded sanction to prosecute author Arundhati Roy and former Central University of Kashmir professor Sheikh Showkat Hussain under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act for allegedly making provocative speeches at an event in New Delhi in 2010.

• The FIR in the matter was registered on a complaint made by Sushil Pandit, a social activist from Kashmir, on October 28, 2010.

What is the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act?

• Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act is an anti-terror law aimed at the effective prevention of unlawful activities of individuals and associations in India. 

• Its main objective is to make powers available for dealing with activities directed against the integrity and sovereignty of India.

• It was passed in 1967 under the Congress government led by PM Indira Gandhi. Later, amendments were brought in under the UPA governments in 2004, 2008 and 2013.

• In August 2019, the President gave approval to The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Act, 2019. 

• The amended Act included provision of designating an individual as a terrorist. Prior to this amendment, only organisations could be designated as terrorist organisations.

• The amendment gave powers to the director general of the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to attach properties acquired from proceeds of terrorism. Earlier, the law required that the NIA take prior permission from the respective state police chief to attach the proceeds of terrorism. 

• Also, the International Convention for Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism (2005) has been added in the Second Schedule through the amendment.

What is the judiciary’s view?

1) Arup Bhuyan vs State Of Assam (2011): The Supreme Court ruled that mere membership in a banned organisation does not automatically make a person guilty. Guilt is established if the person engages in violence, incites violence, or commits acts intending to cause disorder.

2) The People’s Union for Civil Liberties vs Union of India (2004): The Court emphasized that combating terrorism should not lead to human rights violations, as such actions would ultimately undermine the efforts against terrorism.

3) Union of India vs K.A. Najeeb (2021): Despite stringent bail restrictions under the UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act), the Supreme Court affirmed that constitutional courts have the authority to grant bail if fundamental rights of the accused are deemed violated.

4) Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan vs Union of India (2018): The Court recognised the legitimacy of peaceful protests and assemblies against governmental and parliamentary actions. It stressed the importance of maintaining non-violent methods during such demonstrations.

(The author is a trainer for Civil Services aspirants.)