SC restores criminal liability for mere membership of a banned organisation | Latest News India - Hindustan Times
close_game
close_game

SC restores criminal liability for mere membership of a banned organisation

Mar 24, 2023 11:22 AM IST

SC had restored the doctrine of “guilt by association” as it set aside its 2011 judgments, which had ruled that mere membership of a banned organisation cannot be a crime

The Supreme Court on Friday restored the doctrine of “guilt by association” as it set aside its 2011 judgments, which had ruled that mere membership of a banned organisation cannot be a crime.

The top court was considering the Centre’s plea to review the two judgments of 2011. (File image)
The top court was considering the Centre’s plea to review the two judgments of 2011. (File image)

A three-judge bench headed by justice MR Shah noted in its judgment that there was no challenge to the law when the principle of ascribing criminal liability on a person because of their association with a banned organisation was rejected by the court in its previous judgments, nor was the union government heard before the verdict.

Hindustan Times - your fastest source for breaking news! Read now.

Also Read: 14 parties, led by Cong, move Supreme Court against ‘arbitrary use’ of CBI, ED

Overruling a bundle of previous judgments, the bench, also comprising justices CT Ravikumar and Sanjay Karol, affirmed the validity of Section 10(a)(i) in the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967, which makes membership of a banned organisation a crime punishable with a jail term of up to two years.

Underlining that the impugned provision was completely in sync with the objective of the UAPA, the bench held that continued membership of an organisation banned under the 1967 law should be a crime against the sovereignty and integrity of the country.

The top court was considering the Centre’s plea to review the two judgments of 2011, in which a provision of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) (now repealed) was read down to hold that mere membership of a banned organisation cannot incriminate a person unless he or she resorted to or incited violence.

These decisions had come while hearing two separate cases of bail and conviction under TADA.

The Centre complained that not only it was imperative for the two-judge benches to seek its views at the time of hearing these cases but the reading down of the TADA provision had also impacted a similar provision under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), which prescribes punishment for being a member of an unlawful association.

In 2014, the matter was referred to a three-judge bench.

While arguing the case in February, solicitor general Tushar Mehta, representing the union government, argued that the 2011 judgments failed to consider a raft of significant considerations, including the legislative intent and the fact that Parliament, in its wisdom, has engrafted certain provisions to keep the security of the nation intact.

“If Lashkar-e-Taiba is a banned organisation, a person cannot say I am just a member and have a right to remain a member. The right to form an association cannot be an unbridled right, and when it affects sovereignty and integrity of the country, restrictions will be reasonable. The law is preventive in nature and not just punitive,” Mehta had then contended.

Senior advocate Sanjay Parikh, appearing for the other side, had defended the 2011 judgments on the ground that a series of judgments by the Supreme Court since 1960s have held that there must be an overt act of incitement or violence before a person can be prosecuted.

As it reserved its verdict in February, the bench took a grim view of the fact that the 2011 judgments had come while hearing criminal cases in which no party had questioned the legal validity of the TADA provision or the doctrine of “guilty by association”.

“We have to also consider the jurisdiction under which we are hearing a case. If a bail matter is before a court, how can it go into the constitutional validity of a provision without a challenge to that law? Can it be said that merely because we are the Supreme Court, we can go into the validity of anything in any manner?” it had asked on February 8.

Unveiling Elections 2024: The Big Picture', a fresh segment in HT's talk show 'The Interview with Kumkum Chadha', where leaders across the political spectrum discuss the upcoming general elections. Watch now!

Get Current Updates on India News, Election 2024, Arvind Kejriwal News Live, Bihar Board 10th Result 2024 Live along with Latest News and Top Headlines from India and around the world.
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ON
Share this article
SHARE
Story Saved
Live Score
OPEN APP
Saved Articles
Following
My Reads
Sign out
New Delhi 0C
Friday, March 29, 2024
Start 14 Days Free Trial Subscribe Now
Follow Us On