Karnataka HC dismisses plea challenging immediate enforcement of ban on Popular Front of India
The petitioner argued that the government did not cite separate reasons, as required under the UAPA law, for why the ban needed to be effective immediately.
The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday dismissed a petition challenging the immediate enforcement of the ban on Muslim organisation Popular Front of India, Bar and Bench reported.
The organiation’s member named Nasir Pasha had filed the plea through his wife, as he is currently in judicial custody.
Justice M Nagaprasanna of the High Court passed the verdict at 3 pm, but the detailed judgement has not yet been released on public domain.
The Popular Front of India, along with its associates, was banned for five years by the government under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act on September 28.
A government notification alleged that the Muslim organisation along with its eight affiliates have been involved in “violent terrorist activities” and intended to create a reign of terror in the country, endangering security and public order.
In the petition, Pasha contended that under Section 3(3) of the UAPA, the government needed to cite separate and distinct reasons for implementing the ban with immediate effect. He claimed that the organisation was banned by means of a composite order and no separate reason was cited in accordance with the Act, according to Live Law.
The petition claimed that the order was passed suddenly, and that the Popular Front of India was not given an opportunity to dispute it. It contended that giving immediate effect to such moves would give unbridled power to law enforcement authorities to false implicate anyone by alleging that the person is a member of a terrorist organisation.
“The immediate effect further curtails the right of defence before the tribunal but also exposes every member, follower, sympathiser to possible criminal action, when effect is such grave and deterrent, then reasons should be equally convincing and strong,” the petition said.
Meanwhile, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Union government, told the court that reasons had been cited in the notification to ban the organisation, and that there was nothing illegal about the order.
The Centre also alleged that the organisation had been engaging in anti-national activities, and had colluded with terrorist outfits to indulge in violence.
