Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002

The appellant, Maulavi Hussein Haji Abraham Umari, was arrested in connection with a train attack and initially placed in police custody. An application under Section 49(2) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA) was filed to extend his police remand beyond the statutory 30‑day limit, and the Special Court appr…

The appellant, AteeF Nasir Mulla, was arrested in connection with a bomb blast on a local train and repeatedly remanded while the Special Court extended the statutory 90‑day investigation period under Section 49(2)(b) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002. The prosecution’s application for extension detailed a deep‑…

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of sections 2(3) and 2(5) of the Prevention of Terrorism (Repeal) Act, 2004, which allow a Review Committee to deem cases registered under the repealed POTA as withdrawn when it finds no prima facie case. The petitioners (relatives of Godhra‑train victims) argued that th…

The appellant, Maulana Naseeruddin, was charged under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA) and the IPC for allegedly conspiring to murder Hindu leaders by training youths in Pakistan. A confessional statement was recorded by the DCP under Section 32 of POTA on 7 November 2004, which the appellant retracted afte…

The Supreme Court examined the convictions of six accused in the 2002 Akshardham temple terrorist attack, which were based largely on confessional statements recorded under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA), testimony of accomplices, and two Urdu letters allegedly recovered from the terrorists' pockets. The Court …

Harbans Singh and Mohd. Ayub Mir were arrested after a police raid in which a hawala transaction of Rs 7 lakhs was intercepted, the money being handed over in a polythene packet to Mir, a member of Lashkar‑e‑Taiba. Both accused gave confessional statements that were recorded by the DCP Special Branch and later confirme…

Mahmud Rajasa Saiyed was arrested in a POTA case for alleged offences under the IPC, Arms Act and POTA, and was found in possession of a country‑made revolver, a foreign‑made pistol and ten live cartridges recovered from a co‑accused. He applied for bail under Sections 49(6) and 49(7) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act…

Gulam Mohd (Gulal Shaikh) was charged under several IPC, POTA and Arms Act provisions for alleged terrorist activities. He claimed that a confession recorded under Section 32 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 was obtained while he was in illegal custody and later retracted it. He applied for bail under Section 4…

The Supreme Court examined whether a confession or statement recorded under Section 32 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA) can be used as substantive evidence against co‑accused. The Bombay High Court Full Bench had held that such a confession could not be substantive evidence against co‑accused but could b…

The Supreme Court examined a raid that uncovered AK‑56 rifles, ammunition and about 600 g of explosive material at the residence of three accused, leading to prosecution under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA). The State Government’s order withdrawing the POTA cases and the Review Committee’s finding of no p…

The case arose from the Parliament attack of 2001, after which the accused were charged under various statutes including the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA). While the trial was pending, the accused sought an interlocutory order from the Special Judge to exclude intercepted telephone conversations as evidence …

The appellant Kanhaiyalal was convicted under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act based primarily on a statement he gave to an officer under Section 67 of the Act. The key issues were whether such a statement could be used as a confession for conviction, whether it attracted the bar of Sections 24…

The Gujarat High Court granted bail to several accused of the Godhra train fire under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, despite the offences also being covered by the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA). The State appealed, arguing that the accused had not first applied for bail before the Special Court …

The case arose from a private complaint filed under Section 9(1) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) alleging organised crime offences by senior police officials. The Special Court ordered an investigation, but the Bombay High Court Full Bench was split on whether such a complaint could be enterta…

The Supreme Court considered appeals against the Gujarat High Court's judgment that acquitted several accused of murder and terrorism charges in the killing of former Home Minister Haren Pandya and the attempted murder of Jagdish Tiwari. The CBI had investigated and found both incidents were part of a larger conspiracy…

The petitioners, accused under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) and other offences, had their bail applications rejected by Special POTA Courts. The Supreme Court, upholding the constitutionality of sections 2(3) and 5 of the Prevention of Terrorism (Repeal) Act, 2004, deemed the POTA cases withdrawn. Consequentl…