Supreme Court Issues Notice To NIA On Bail Plea Of Man Booked Over Alleged Association With IS

The Supreme Court today issued notice on the bail plea of Mazin Abdul Rahman who has been booked under provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act over alleged association with banned terrorist outfit Islamic State (IS).

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta was dealing with Rahman's challenge to a Karnataka High Court order, which dismissed his appeal against the special court order denying bail.

“Article 21 cannot be stretched too long to afford protection to persons who have least concern for rule of law and pose threat to sovereignty and integrity of the nation", the High Court observed.

Briefly put, Mazin Abdul Rahman is charged with Sections 120B, 121, 121A of IPC and Sections 18, 20 and 38 of UAPA. The allegation against him is that he was part of banned outfit-IS and conducted recce of targets in Mangalore to conduct arson being in close contact with the other co-accused. The intention of all the accused was to wage war against India, as per the prosecution.

Among other things, Rahman argued before the High Court that except for the allegation that he was involved in conducting recce, there were no allegations against him indicative of his involvement in anti-national activities. The charge sheet disclosed that accused No.2 induced him to conduct recce. This allegation was also based on the voluntary statement said to have been given by accused No.2.

It was further submitted that as per Section 43D(5) of the UAPA, the accusation against the accused must prima facie appear to be true. But in Rahman's case, if the entire charge sheet is scrutinized, it cannot be said that there is prima facie truth in the accusations and therefore he was entitled to claim bail.

The prosecution opposed the appeal submitting that Rahman used several encrypted communication platforms and received several incriminating materials. The CDR indicated his proximity with accused No.2. Further, the statements of witnesses showed that he downloaded materials/preachings from the dark web. The prosecution also argued that according to Section 43D(5), the Court has to arrive at a satisfaction that the accusation is prima facie true. Once the materials indicate that the accusations are prima facie true, the consideration of other factors for granting bail does not arise.

After hearing both sides, the High Court held that Section 18 of the UAPA envisages punishment not only for conspiracy but also for other acts such as attempts to commit a terrorist act, advocating, abetting, advising, inciting, facilitating directly or knowingly, the commission of a terrorist act or any act preparatory to the commission of a terrorist act. Conducting recce at some places was to facilitate the commission of a terrorist act, it concluded.

“It is our considered view that Constitutional powers cannot be exercised when materials produced before the court prima facie show or indicate threat to unity, integrity and sovereignty of our country, instead it is the duty of the Constitutional Courts to protect the nation and its society from such people who indulge in anti national and anti societal activities. Without the nation there is no Constitution", the High Court stated.

Accordingly, the Court denied the prayer for bail and dismissed the appeal.

Case Title: MAZIN ABDUL RAHMAN @ MAZIN vs. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY, Diary No. - 56454/2025

Click Here To Read/Download Order