YASMEEN MOHAMMED ZAHID Vs. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above appeal is instituted under Section 21 (4) of National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred as the 'NIA Act' for short) against the order passed by the Special Court for N.I.A cases, Ernakulam in Crl. M.P No.22/2017 in SC 1/2017/NIA, dated 18-02-2017. By the order impugned, the Special Court had rejected an application for bail submitted by the appellant herein, who is accused No.2 in SC 1/2017/NIA. The appellant contended that the rejection of her bail application was illegal, erroneous and unjustified.

(2.) The appellant stands implicated as 2nd accused in the case registered in which altogether there are 15 accused. The case is being investigated by National Investigation Agency (NIA). The investigating agency had filed a final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C against accused No.1 and 2 in the case. Gist of the charge is that, the appellant along with the 1st accused and accused No.3 to 15 hatched a conspiracy during 2016 at Padanna and surrounding areas of Kasargod District as well as in other places within and outside India with the intention of furthering the activities of a proscribed terrorist organisation namely Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) which is wagging war against Asiatic nations which are in alliance with the Government of India. It is alleged that in pursuance of the said conspiracy the 1st accused had travelled to ISIS controlled territories in Afghanistan and joined the said organisation. He is continuing activities in support of the said organisation by propagating its ideology and in support for the same through various means including, but not limited to, internet based social media platforms. It is alleged that the appellant herein who was an active participant along with the 1st accused in the criminal conspiracy to support and to furthering the objective of ISIS, with the intention of joining the said organisation in Afghanistan, tried to exit India on 30-07-2016 through the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. The 1st accused had raised funds for the said organisation and a portion of the funds were transferred to the appellant for facilitating her travel to ISIS controlled territory. The appellant had received and utilized the said funds provided by the 1st accused for her preparations for travel and for her further activities of the said organisation. Hence it is alleged that the appellant had committed offences punishable under Section 120 B read with Section 125 of the IPC and Section 38, 39 and 40 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as 'UA (P) Act' for short).

(3.) The appellant had raised contentions before the court below that, she is totally innocent of the charges alleged. That she is hailing from Bihar and is a divorcee having a 4 year old innocent child with her. It is stated that she had worked earlier in Kerala as a school teacher and one of her cousin brothers is now working in a school near Ernakulam. She contended that the innocent child is also suffering in the judicial custody. She claimed special treatment under the statutory provisions of Section 437 Cr.P.C, being a lady. It is contended that it is not justifiable to keep her in prison by separating the child from his mother in the tender age of 4 years.