Delhi High Court Denies Bail to Suspected ISIS Member in Arms Case

The Delhi High Court has denied bail to Mohd Rizwan Ashraf, a suspected member of the Islamic State (ISIS), who is accused of procuring arms and ammunition for the group and using social media to advance its agenda. The court’s decision, made by justices Subramonium Prasad and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, upheld a previous detention order from a trial court, asserting that releasing Ashraf could hinder the ongoing investigation.

In its ruling, the High Court emphasized that the trial court’s decision to extend Ashraf’s custody was not arbitrary. The bench noted that the trial court had thoroughly considered the circumstances surrounding the case, confirming that the investigation had made significant progress during the remand periods. The judges stated, “This court is satisfied that the trial court applied its mind to the grounds set forth.” The court highlighted that the investigation was dynamic, with substantial developments occurring throughout the remand extensions granted.

Ashraf was apprehended by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in 2023 under the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). He challenged various trial court orders that extended his custody, including one issued on February 24, 2024, which added an additional 25 days to his judicial remand. On the same day, the trial court dismissed his plea for default bail.

Ashraf’s legal representatives contended that the trial court’s orders were issued in a routine and perfunctory manner, lacking an individual assessment of his involvement. They argued that the NIA had not sufficiently demonstrated the necessity of continued detention for the investigation.

The High Court, however, countered these claims by stating that Ashraf, along with two other accused individuals, was actively engaged in ISIS-related activities. The court noted that they were not only propagating the group’s ideology but also attempting to recruit young people for its causes. The judges pointed out that during the remand process, evidence had emerged indicating that Ashraf and others were conducting reconnaissance in various Indian cities, including Delhi, Mumbai, Ahmedabad, and Surat, for potential terrorist activities.

Additionally, the High Court mentioned ongoing investigations into a financial trail connected to the Maldives and other potential associates of the accused. The bench remarked, “At the time when the remand orders were being considered, material was being unearthed to establish that the accused, including the appellant (Ashraf), were conducting recce at various Indian cities.”

The outcome of this case underscores the judiciary’s commitment to addressing national security concerns while balancing the rights of the accused. As investigations continue, the authorities are focused on uncovering the broader network associated with ISIS and its operations within India and beyond.