NEW DELHI: A day after a fatal car blast near Delhi’s Red Fort, the Supreme Court of India denied bail to UAPA accused Syed Mamoor Ali, who is charged with promoting ISIS ideology and planning terrorist activities. The bench, comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta, upheld the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s refusal and made strong observations during the Tuesday hearing.
Supreme court observation
Acknowledging the context
Appearing for the accused, senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave conceded the volatile national atmosphere following the Red Fort blast. “Given yesterday’s events, it may not be the best time to argue this case,” he said.
But Justice Nath responded sharply, saying, “This is precisely the best morning to deliver a strong message.”
The Bench expressed a firm position on the need to show strength in the face of growing worries about terror-related activity.
Evidence and Defense—
The court emphasized that the accused had recovered inflammatory content. Although Dave clarified that this material constituted only Islamic literature, Justice Mehta countered by observing that the accused had established a WhatsApp group prominently featuring a flag analogous to that of ISIS.
In defense, Dave underscored two key facts: no RDX or explosive material was found on his client, and the accused suffers from a 70% disability.
The court’s decision—
Despite these arguments, the Supreme Court refused to grant bail to the accused because it considered the charges to be serious. Despite denying bail, the SC stipulates that the trial must be completed within two years. Furthermore, it stipulated that the accused would be permitted to reapply for bail should the trial be prolonged for reasons outside of his control.
Details of the Case
The National Investigation Agency has accused Ali and his co-accused of engaging in several terrorist activities:
- Forming an ISIS-affiliated WhatsApp group: They created a WhatsApp group called ‘Fisabilillah’ featuring iconography similar to the ISIS flag.
- Planning an arms procurement attack: they planned an attack on the Jabalpur Ordnance factory with a call for acquiring weapons.
- Distributing extremist propaganda: they prepared and disseminated pamphlets resembling the flags of ISIS and Al-Qaeda at the local mosque to influence others.
- Gathering extremist digital content: They gathered digital content, such as the magazine “Voice of Khurasan,” that promoted jihad and ISIS ideology.
- Attempting to destroy evidence: They used applications like Sherddit to delete incriminating digital evidence.
- Discussing terrorist operations: their discussion included planning organizational funding, suicide bombing, and martyrdom.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court earlier ruled that Ali’s physical handicap does not mitigate the threat of ideological driver terrorism, which they noted spreads primarily through influence and incitement.
Charges against Ali
Ali faces charges under multiple sections of the UAPA, that is, sections 13, 16, 17, 18, 18B, 20, 38, 39, and 40, and IPC sections 120B and 295A. These pertain to
- Criminal conspiracy
- Promoting enmity between religious group
- Terrorist activities
- Preparing and planning of unlawful acts
Background
An explosion at the Central Security Institute Ordinance factory in Khamarai, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, injured at least 16 people on October 22, 2024. The blast, which was powerful enough to be heard up to five kilometers away, was reportedly caused by a hydraulic system malfunction during bomb filling in Building 200 of the F-6 section; three employees are currently hospitalized in critical condition. While factory officials have arrived at the site but have not yet issued an official statement.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
I am Nishu Lamba, a law graduate and a growing legal writer. I am building my career as a corporate lawyer with my skills in contract drafting and legal research. Through my writing, I aim to make legal topics clear and easy to understand for readers.