New Delhi, July 31, 2026: The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed the Uttarakhand government's plea challenging the bail granted to Abdul Malik, an accused in the 2024 Haldwani violence case, while raising serious questions over the invocation of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohan declined to interfere with the Uttarakhand High Court's April 16, 2026, order granting bail to Malik.
The court observed that even if the High Court's reasoning was not elaborate, it was not a sufficient ground to interfere in a matter concerning personal liberty, Live Law reported.
SC Questions UAPA Invocation
Malik is facing charges under several provisions of the Indian Penal Code, the UAPA, the Arms Act and other laws in connection with the February 8, 2024, Banbhoolpura violence in Haldwani.
The High Court had granted him bail after noting that the investigation itself showed he was not present at the scene during the violence. It also noted that his son, Abdul Moied, and other co-suspects had already been granted bail.
Appearing for the State, Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia argued that Malik was the "main conspirator" behind the violence and that his physical absence from the spot did not weaken the prosecution's case. He also contended that the High Court had passed a non-speaking order without considering the stringent bail restrictions under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA.
However, Justice Joymalya Bagchi questioned whether the anti-terror law was applicable at all. Referring to the allegations that a mob had set a police station on fire and hurled petrol bombs, the judge asked, "If a mob goes and burns down a police station, will that per se attract UAPA?"
When Bhatia argued that the law applied because the incident threatened public order, Justice Bagchi pointed out that there was a clear distinction between public order and national security.
The Bench said it had "serious doubt" over the addition of UAPA charges, with Justice Bagchi remarking that this was one of the reasons the court was not inclined to entertain the State's special leave petition.
Liberty Cannot Depend On Technicalities
The State also argued that the High Court's bail order lacked adequate reasons. However, Justice Bagchi said the issue of liberty could not depend only on how detailed a court's order was.
"Liberty does not depend on inaccuracy of a court. It depends on the prosecution case," he observed. When Bhatia cited Supreme Court judgments holding that bail should not be granted through cryptic orders, Justice Bagchi responded that those judgments may require reconsideration.
Chief Justice Surya Kant echoed the view that appellate courts should not interfere merely because the High Court's reasoning was imperfect. He observed that the order sufficiently reflected an application of mind and noted that Malik had already spent two years in custody. The Chief Justice said that even if bail had been granted for a wrong reason, it was not necessary for the Supreme Court to interfere.
Bench Flags Trial Delay
The Bench also expressed concern over the slow pace of the trial. Justice Bagchi remarked that if the allegations were as serious as claimed by the State, the prosecution should have secured a conviction by now.
"If demoralising of police is your concern, you should have obtained conviction in two years. You have abysmally failed," Justice Bagchi told the State.
Bhatia argued that the seriousness of the offence, which could attract life imprisonment, outweighed the fact that Malik had spent two years in custody. He further claimed that Malik posed a danger to society and submitted that the pace of the trial was under the control of the trial court.
Also Watch:
The Bench, however, observed that if there had been delays, the prosecution could have approached the High Court or the Supreme Court seeking an expedited trial. Justice Bagchi also noted that the defence had an "arguable case" against the invocation of the UAPA, reinforcing the court's reluctance to interfere with the bail granted by the High Court.
To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/
