Archive · 7 Sep 2026
Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Two UAPA Accused
The Delhi High Court granted bail to two people accused in a terrorism-related case.
They had been in jail for almost five years before their trial was finished.
The court said the trial was unlikely to end soon.
Prosecutors have examined only 21 of 359 witnesses.
The National Investigation Agency says the accused were connected to a larger conspiracy.
It alleges that the network spread propaganda and tried to radicalise young people.
The accused persons denied important parts of these allegations and challenged the evidence against them.
The court said its bail observations would not decide whether they are guilty or innocent.
They must follow restrictions, including getting permission before travelling outside India.
The Delhi High Court granted bail to Sobiya Aziz and Kamran Ashraf Reshi in a 2021 UAPA case.
Both had spent nearly five years in custody while awaiting trial.
The prosecution has examined 21 of 359 witnesses, with 338 still remaining.
The NIA alleged links to a larger conspiracy involving terrorist propaganda and youth radicalisation in Jammu and Kashmir.
The court barred foreign travel without permission and restricted participation in platforms spreading anti-national material.
- Who
- The Delhi High Court granted bail to Sobiya Aziz and Kamran Ashraf Reshi; the National Investigation Agency opposed their release.
- What
- The court granted bail to two accused in a 2021 UAPA case after nearly five years in custody.
- When
- The bail order was issued on September 3; the accused were arrested in October 2021.
- Where
- The case was heard by the Delhi High Court and concerns alleged activities linked to Jammu and Kashmir.
- Why
- The court cited prolonged incarceration, the slow progress of the trial, and the lack of a likelihood that proceedings would end soon.
Defence arguments
National Investigation Agency’s arguments
Trial delay and custody
Defence arguments
The accused argued that nearly five years in custody was excessive because the trial was not likely to end soon.
National Investigation Agency’s arguments
The NIA relied on the seriousness of the allegations and said continued custody was justified.
Evidence against Sobiya Aziz
Defence arguments
Her lawyers said she had no criminal record, had been discharged from some charges, and that merely being in a car carrying alleged arms did not prove knowledge of them.
National Investigation Agency’s arguments
The NIA alleged that she was part of a conspiracy to wage war against India and support terrorist activities, and warned she could threaten witnesses.
Evidence against Kamran Ashraf Reshi
Defence arguments
His lawyers said there was no proof of operational terrorist involvement, links to the alleged Telegram group, or responsibility for preparing or circulating a threatening pamphlet.
National Investigation Agency’s arguments
The NIA cited mobile phones, the pamphlet, Pakistan contacts, witness statements, and alleged links with radicalising groups as evidence of association with a terrorist network.
- Case
- 2021 UAPA case concerning an alleged larger conspiracy
- Accused released on bail
- Sobiya Aziz and Kamran Ashraf Reshi
- Custody period
- Nearly five years
- Witnesses examined
- 21 of 359 prosecution witnesses
- Witnesses remaining
- 338
- Agency opposing bail
- National Investigation Agency
- Bail restrictions
- No foreign travel without trial-court permission; no participation in platforms spreading anti-national material