Supreme Court agrees to examine UAPA charges in gold smuggling case in Kerala

The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday agreed to examine the important legal questions as to whether the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) could be applicable in gold smuggling in Kerala cases or not. This latest development comes as the apex court was hearing the appeal filed by the central government and the National Investigation Agency (NIA), which had submitted that there was confusion in the legality of the application of UAPA in gold smuggling cases after 2 HC- Kerala and Rajasthan had come to divergent conclusions on the issue. 

SC refuses NIA plea seeking direction to cancel bail granted by Kerala HC

The Supreme Court, however, refused to allow the plea of the NIA seeking direction to cancel the bail granted by the Kerala High Court to 12 accused, who were allegedly caught in the smuggling case. In the Gold Smuggling case, 30 kilograms of 24-carat gold to the tune of around Rs 15 crores was seized at Thiruvananthapuram airport on July 5, 2020, by the Customs department.

A bench of the top court, headed by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Nuthalapati Venkata Ramana and comprising Justice AS Bopanna and Hrishikesh Roy said, "They (accused) all are employees of the government. We will not enter into the bail cancellation aspect. If you (Centre and NIA) want then we can leave the legal question open."

The Kerala High Court, while granting bail to the 12 accused in the gold smuggling case, had observed that the UAPA cannot be invoked or applicable in the case. It had said that smuggling cannot come under the purview of the act unless there were enough evidence to show that it was done with the intent to threaten the economic security of the country.

Meanwhile, the Rajasthan High Court had in a case, ruled that a gold smuggler, prosecuted under customs Act, could also be prosecuted under UAPA, and the accused persons can be tried under the law for relevant sections under the charge of terror. The Rajasthan High Court passed the order after going through a petition where an accused sought to quash the UAPA charges levelled against him there in the Rajasthan High Court. 

(Image: Shutterstock, Unsplash-Representative)