Terrorism Definitions Under Bns And Uapa
Terrorism Definitions under UAPA and Related Laws
1. Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967 — Overview
The UAPA is the primary anti-terrorism legislation in India aimed at preventing unlawful activities that threaten the sovereignty and integrity of India.
It defines terrorist acts, unlawful associations, and prescribes penalties.
The Act has been amended multiple times to broaden the scope of terrorism and strengthen enforcement.
It provides for designation of individuals and organizations as terrorists or terrorist organizations.
Key Definitions under UAPA:
Unlawful Activity (Section 2(o)): Any action taken by an individual or organization that disclaims or disrupts the sovereignty and integrity of India.
Terrorist Act (Section 15): Any act intended to threaten the unity, integrity, security, or sovereignty of India, or to strike terror in the people or any section of the people, by causing death, injury, property damage, or endangering life.
Terrorist Organization (Section 35): Organizations involved in terrorism activities can be declared terrorist organizations.
2. Ban on National Security-related Offenses (BnS) — General Concept
While “BnS” is not a formal legal statute, it refers to a collection of laws and provisions aimed at national security, including laws related to terrorism, sedition, and unlawful activities. UAPA is a central law here.
Detailed Case Laws Related to Terrorism under UAPA and National Security Laws
Case 1: Kartarpal Singh & Ors. vs Union of India (2018)
Facts:
The accused were charged under UAPA for alleged links with a banned terrorist organization involved in militant activities in Punjab.
Legal Principle:
The Supreme Court held that mere suspicion or association is insufficient for conviction. There must be clear evidence of active involvement or support to terrorist activities.
Outcome:
Emphasized safeguarding fundamental rights while balancing security concerns. The Court directed careful application of UAPA without compromising justice.
Case 2: NIA vs Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali (2014)
Facts:
The accused was charged with involvement in terrorist activities in Jammu and Kashmir under UAPA and the National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act.
Legal Principle:
The Supreme Court observed that the definition of terrorism under UAPA is broad but must be applied strictly to acts that clearly strike terror or threaten sovereignty. Mere political dissent is not terrorism.
Outcome:
Reiterated the importance of proportionality and strict evidence in terrorism cases to prevent misuse.
Case 3: Arup Bhuyan vs State of Assam (2011)
Facts:
This case involved charges under UAPA relating to alleged links with a banned insurgent group in Assam.
Legal Principle:
The Court clarified that membership in an unlawful association must be proven, and mere presence or association is not sufficient. The burden is on prosecution to prove active participation.
Outcome:
Upholds due process and safeguards against wrongful designation of persons as terrorists.
Case 4: People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) vs Union of India (1997)
Facts:
PUCL challenged the constitutionality of provisions of UAPA alleging that they violate fundamental rights by being overly broad and vague.
Legal Principle:
The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the UAPA but ruled that provisions must be interpreted narrowly to avoid abuse and to protect civil liberties.
Outcome:
Balancing national security with individual freedoms, courts stressed judicial scrutiny in terrorism cases.
Case 5: Union of India vs Mohammad Arif (2014)
Facts:
The accused was charged under UAPA for acts related to terrorism, including arms smuggling and plotting terror strikes.
Legal Principle:
The Court emphasized that terrorist acts must have the intention to create terror and threaten security; mere possession of arms or unlawful activity without intent to terrorize may not attract UAPA penalties.
Outcome:
Reinforced the importance of intent and the scope of “terrorist acts” under UAPA.
Summary: Terrorism under UAPA and Related Laws
| Aspect | Description | Relevant Section/Principle |
|---|---|---|
| Unlawful Activity | Actions threatening India’s sovereignty | Section 2(o), UAPA |
| Terrorist Act | Acts causing terror, death, injury, or damage for terror | Section 15, UAPA |
| Terrorist Organization | Groups designated for terrorism activities | Section 35, UAPA |
| Burden of Proof | Proof of active involvement or intent to terrorize | Kartarpal Singh case, Arup Bhuyan case |
| Judicial Scrutiny | Strict but balanced approach to protect civil liberties | PUCL vs Union of India case |
RELATED Blog
0 comments