TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
Sports
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | United StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
Don't Miss
Advertisement

Gold smuggling does not amount to terrorist act under UAPA: Delhi HC

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement
Advertisement

New Delhi, June 4

Advertisement

Smuggling of gold alone won’t amount to a terrorist act under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), unless it threatened the economic security or monetary stability of India, the Delhi High Court has said.

“Possession, use, production, transfer of counterfeit currency or coin is per-se illegal and an offence, however, production, possession, use etc. of ‘gold’ is not per-se illegal or an offence… Thus mere smuggling of gold without any connection whatsoever to threatening economic security or monetary stability of India cannot be a terrorist act,” a Bench led by Justice Mukta Gupta said.

It granted bail to nine persons accused of smuggling more than 500 gold biscuits (83.6 kg gold) which was seized at New Delhi Railway Station by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) in August 2020 while travelling in Dibrugarh-New Delhi Rajdhani Express on fake documents. The case was later handed over to the National Investigation Agency (NIA).

Advertisement

The accused were charged with offences under certain provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the UAPA.

After a special court denied them bail in May 2021, they moved the high court, contending the prosecution had no evidence against them, except the statements made under the Customs Act which were inadmissible in a UAPA trial and that there was no material on record to show that the gold was procured from a foreign country.

On behalf of NIA, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju had opposed the bail plea, contending that there was a larger conspiracy to commit a terrorist act by disturbing the economic stability of India. But the HC wasn’t convinced.

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement