(1.) Present Appeal is directed against the impugned Order dtd. 12/7/2023, passed below Exh.12, in Special Case No.1493 of 2022, by the learned Special Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai, thereby, the said Application (Exh.12) filed by the Appellant/Original Accused No.6 for grant of bail, was rejected. Said case arises out of RC No.02/2022/NIA/MUM, under Ss. 109, 120B, 302, 153-A, 201 and 505 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC') and Ss. 16, 18 and 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 ('UAPA').
(2.) Heard Dr. Chaudhry, the learned counsel for the Appellant, Ms. Mhatre, the learned APP for the Respondent No.1-State and Mr. Singh, the Additional Solicitor General of India for the Respondent No.2-NIA. Perused the record.
(3.) The prosecution case is that, on 26/5/2022, the ex- spokesperson of a political party named 'BJP', made a controversial comment in a TV debate. Her said statement went viral on social media, which caused outrage in the Muslim community at Amravati. Therefore, on 8/6/2022 Accused Nos.7, 9 and others went to Nagpuri Gate Police Station at Amravati and requested registration of an FIR on account of that comment. The police refused to register such an FIR as number of FIRs were already registered in that regard at other Police Stations. As alleged, on 9/6/2022, a special meeting of the Muslim community was called by A-7 and A-9, through a WhatsApp group 'Meeting Only', at Roshan Hall, Amravati, to discuss the issue of the controversial comment and to take a call to appeal for 'Bharat Band' but for the intervention of the local police, the said call was not taken. However, the A-7, A-9 and A-10 were not satisfied with that resolution. Thereafter, a chain of messages in support and against that controversial comment went viral on social media. Between 9/6/2022 to 11/6/2022, certain persons had supported the controversial comment through social media. Therefore, they were threatened by A-1 and A-10 and asked to post an apology.