1 hr ago
NIA Court Rejects Shabir Shah’s Bail Plea in 1996 Violence Case
A court in Jammu has refused to release Shabir Ahmad Shah on bail.
The case is about violence during a funeral procession in Srinagar in 1996.
The National Investigation Agency says Shah played an active role before the violence.
Shah’s lawyers say he did not carry a weapon or fire a shot.
They also argued that the investigation was finished and that Shah is 73.
The judge said releasing him could put protected witnesses and a fair trial at risk.
Four people have been declared protected witnesses.
The court also said other accused people’s bail decisions did not mean Shah had to be released.
Charges have not yet been framed.
A special NIA court in Jammu rejected separatist leader Shabir Ahmad Shah’s bail plea in a case stemming from a 1996 Srinagar violence incident.
The case concerns violence, stone-pelting and firing on police during a funeral procession at Naaz crossing.
The judge cited risks to protected witnesses and the fair conduct of the trial, while noting that charges had yet to be framed.
The NIA alleges Shah led the procession and made provocative speeches; his defence says he neither carried nor used a weapon.
The NIA filed its charge sheet on July 10 after taking over the investigation in April.
- Who
- Separatist leader Shabir Ahmad Shah, the National Investigation Agency and the special NIA court in Jammu.
- What
- The court rejected Shah’s bail application in a case arising from a 1996 incident of violence, stone-pelting and firing on police.
- Where
- The court is in Jammu; the incident took place at Naaz crossing in Srinagar.
- When
- The bail plea was heard on Tuesday, October 7; the report does not specify the year.
- Why
- The judge cited concerns about prejudice to the trial and the security and confidence of protected witnesses.
Prosecution and court concerns
Defence arguments
Risk to witnesses and trial
Prosecution and court concerns
The NIA cited protected witnesses and the possibility of intimidation; the judge said release could prejudice a fair trial and affect witness confidence and security.
Defence arguments
Shah’s counsel argued that the investigation was concluded after the charge sheet was filed and there was no impediment to considering bail on its merits.
Shah’s alleged role
Prosecution and court concerns
The NIA described Shah as an alleged principal leader of the procession and attributed provocative slogans and inflammatory speeches to him.
Defence arguments
The defence said there was no allegation Shah carried or used a weapon or fired a shot; the firing was attributed to unidentified armed persons.
Bail and continued detention
Prosecution and court concerns
The judge said Shah could not claim bail simply because some co-accused had been released, distinguishing their cases because their investigations were complete and investigators no longer needed their custody.
Defence arguments
The defence cited Shah’s age, prolonged incarceration, speedy-trial rights under Article 21 and a Supreme Court bail order in another NIA case.
Key facts
- Accused
- Shabir Ahmad Shah, 73
- Court
- Special NIA court in Jammu
- Case origin
- 1996 FIR concerning violence during a funeral procession in Srinagar
- Investigation
- The NIA took over the investigation in April on Ministry of Home Affairs directions.
- Charge sheet
- Filed before the special court on July 10
- Protected witnesses
- The court said four people had been declared protected witnesses.
- UAPA provision
- The court noted that Section 13 was the only UAPA offence invoked against Shah.
Sources
Related news
Delhi High Court Grants Bail After Eight Years’ Incarceration
Delhi High Court Grants Bail After Five Years’ Custody
Delhi High Court Grants Bail After Eight-Year Terror Trial Delay
Delhi High Court Again Denies Bail to Khalid, Imam
Delhi Court Lets Seven Foreign Nationals Leave India Temporarily
Supreme Court Quashes Mulla Afroz’s NSA Detention in Sambhal Case
Manoj Sinha Orders Major Reshuffle of 49 Jammu and Kashmir Officers
Sikh Community Protests for Punjabi in Jammu Schools
Jammu EOW Charges Two in Alleged ₹1.22 Crore Investment Scam
Farooq Abdullah Calls for Review of Jammu and Kashmir Reservation Policy