SC: Timelines for sanction under UAPA mandatory, have to be strictly followed

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday held that the timeline stipulated for recommendation and grant of prosecution sanction under the anti-terror law UAPA has to be strictly adhered to as without such limitations, power will enter the realm of the “unbridled” which is “antithetical to a democratic society”.

A bench of Justices CT Ravikumar and Sanjay Karol, delivering a 63-page judgement, clarified that Rules 3 and 4 of the UAPA Rules mandate a seven-day period for the concerned authority to make its recommendation based on evidence gathered by the investigating officer, followed by another seven days for the government to grant the prosecution sanction. The bench highlighted that these timelines are “unquestionably important” for ensuring checks and balances.

“There must be limitations within which administrative authorities exercise their powers. Without such limitations, power will enter the realm of the unbridled, which is antithetical to a democratic society,” the bench stated. It further added that the timelines serve as crucial safeguards to ensure fairness in the prosecution process.

The ruling came in response to an appeal by Fuleshwar Gope, who was allegedly a member of the People’s Liberation Front of India (PLFI), a splinter group of the CPI (Maoist) in Jharkhand. Gope had challenged the Jharkhand High Court’s decision to dismiss his plea against the grant of prosecution sanction under the UAPA. He argued that the sanction process had not adhered to the required timeline. The Supreme Court, while addressing Gope’s appeal, clarified that challenges to prosecution sanctions must be raised at the earliest possible stage in trial proceedings. The court expressed concern that delayed challenges could potentially stall or obstruct trials, and emphasised that “belated challenges on these grounds cannot be allowed to act as roadblocks.”

The court also ruled that the strict adherence to UAPA timelines must be followed prospectively, meaning that the verdict will not impact past cases where the rules may not have been observed. The bench noted that as UAPA is a penal legislation, it requires strict interpretation. “Timelines imposed by statutory Rules are necessary to keep a check on executive power and to protect the rights of accused persons,” the judgement stated.Gope was granted the right to raise arguments concerning the application of mind in granting the prosecution sanction during his trial, but the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the High Court’s order.