STATE Vs. NAVJOT SANDHU ALIAS AFSHAN GURU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Heard parties.

(3.) Briefly stated the facts are as follows: On 13th December, 2001 five terrorist attacked the Parliament of India. After an encounter, with the security forces, the five terrorists were shot dead. A F.I.R. was lodged by the Station House Officer, Police Station, Parliament Street. A case under Sections 120, 120B, 121, 121A, 122, 124, 186, 332, 353, 302, and 307 IPC, Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act was registered. Investigation was then initiated. From the slain terrorists apart from arms, ammunitions and other items, three mobile phones, 6 sim cards and slips of paper containing five mobile telephone numbers and other two telephone numbers were recovered. It is the case of the prosecution that due urgency authorisation intercept was granted by the Joint Direcr of Intelligence Bureau, who was associated with the investigation. It is the case of the prosecution that this authorisation was as per the provisions of the Telegraph Act i.e.5 of the Telegraph Act read with Rule 419A. It is the case of the prosecution that the interception disclosed the involvement of the respondents in the conspiracy attack the Parliament of India. It is the case of the prosecution that as a result of the interceptions and the interrogations of the respondents, it was disclosed that the slain terrorists and the respondents were in uch with one Ghazi Baba, who is a Pakistani national and the supreme commander of Jaish-e-Mohammed which is a notified and banned terrorist organisation under 18 of Prevention of Terrorist Act, 2002 and the schedule there (the Prevention of Terrorism Act will hereinafter be referred as POTA). It is the case of the prosecution that after the investigation officers had, in the course of the investigation, collected the relevant and cogent material it was found that a case under POTA was made out. It is the case of the prosecution that relevant sections of POTA were added on 19 th December, 2001 only after it was ensured that offences under POTA were made out. It is the case of the prosecution that this was done in view of the well established law laid down by this Court, in the context of TADA, that there must be due application of mind and cogent material before the special rigorous regime is added. It is the case of the prosecution that on 31st December, 2001 and 19 th January, 2002 the Home Secretary approved the interception.