You are on page 1of 33






Teacher Associate




ROLL NO: 2022



Page 1 of 33


I hereby declare that the work reported in the BBA. LL.B (Hons.) Project Report
entitled “PREVENTION OF TERRORISM ACT” submitted at Chanakya
National Law University is an authentic record of my work carried out under the
supervision of Mr. Vijayant Sinha. I have not submitted this work elsewhere for
any other degree or diploma. I am fully responsible for the contents of my Project




Page 2 of 33


I would like to thank my faculty Mr. Vijayant Sinha Sir whose guidance helped
me a lot with structuring my project.

I owe the present accomplishment of my project to my friends, who helped me
immensely with materials throughout the project and without whom I couldn’t
have completed it in the present way.

I would also like to extend my gratitude to my parents and all those unseen hands
that helped me out at every stage of my project.



COURSE: BBA. LL.B. (Hons.)

ROLL NO: 2022


Page 3 of 33

Brief Introduction about Mob lynching. * BIBLIOGRAPHY Page 4 of 33 . 7. Initiatives taken by government. 6. Role of NGO’s. 4. Impact of Mob lynching. 3. Recommendations and Conclusion. INDEX INTRODUCTION * AIMS AND OBJECTIVES * HYPOTHESIS * RESEARCH METHODOLOGY * SOURCES OF DATA * TENTATIVE CHAPTERIZATION 1. Recent issues of Mob lynching. Reasons of Mob lynching in India. 2. 5.

” Three months later. intensification of cross border terrorism. abetted. Moreover. which lapsed in 1995 after years of abuse. allegedly backed by Pakistan. the potential threat of the Tamil Tigers in the south. and it is unsurprising that government officials felt compelled to act swiftly and forcefully in the wake of Al Qaeda’s assault on the United States. 2001 sent shockwaves of fear and insecurity far beyond the borders of the United States. India’s Union Cabinet issued the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO) in October 2001. On December 13. for over ten years. detain. To some. India has seen the assassination of its most prominent civil rights leader. POTO bore an ominous resemblance to the notorious Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (hereinafter TADA). Most notably.” The ordinance granted state law enforcement sweeping powers to investigate. international crime network distributing weapons and explosives to all of the above. The Cabinet condemned the attack as targeting “the very heart of our system of governance. and violence raged on. it was clear that the struggle was about to get harder. India in particular had reason to be afraid. supported. terrorists in Kashmir had killed thousands of civilians. India has been fighting insurgents in Kashmir. or benefited from the proceeds of terrorism. attacked the Indian parliament in a failed attempt to assassinate legislators.As of the fall of 2001. policemen. and insurgent groups in different parts of the country. Muslim terrorists. during a rare joint session Page 5 of 33 . Add to these concerns the continued separatist violence in India’s northeast. a former prime minister. harbored. including Islamic radicals from Pakistan and Afghanistan . and the existence of an organized. The central government claimed its action was a response to “an upsurge of terrorist activities. PREVENTION OF TERRORISM ACT The terrorist attacks of September 11. Despite some initial criticism. As a nation already at war with terror. a prime minister. Since gaining independence fifty years ago. POTO targeted those who allegedly incited. on what is the symbol and the keystone of the largest democracy in the world. and its fear was not merely for the 250 Indian citizens who were trapped in the burning towers of the World Trade Center. events in India soon made POTO an apparent necessity to the ruling coalition and many other legislators. and a retired Army chief. and Indian soldiers. 2001. however. concealed. and prosecute for a wide range of terrorist-related offenses.

convened at the Prime Minister’s request. 3. To analyse what is the root cause of Mob lynching in India. The researcher tends to analyse the facts of “Mob lynching’’ 2. HYPOTHESIS For the purpose of this research. To understand What needs to be done . Page 6 of 33 . the researcher assumes that mob lynching is a form of gruesome collective vigilantism by majority against minority. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The researcher will be relying on Doctrinal method of research to complete the project. the temporary ordinance became the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA). AIMS AND OBJECTIVES 1.

Various legal systems and government agencies use different definitions. cases and websites. a United Nations Security Council report described terrorism as any act "Intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act". journals. After the Jacobins lost power. The Jacobins cited this precedent when imposing a Reign of Terror during the French Revolution. In many countries. Primary Sources: Acts & Articles relating to mob lynching. 2. acts of terrorism are legally distinguished from criminal acts done for other purposes. 1. In November 2004. and "terrorism" is defined by statute. SOURCES OF DATA The researcher will be relying on both primary and secondary sources to complete the project. There is no universal agreement on the definition of terrorism. Moreover. the word "terrorist" became a term of abuse. In modern times "Terrorism" usually refers to the killing of innocent people by a private group in such a way as to create a media spectacle. governments have been reluctant to formulate an agreed upon and legally Page 7 of 33 . Secondary Sources: Newspapers. WHAT IS TERRORISM Terrorism is the most henious activities in the world The term "Terrorism" comes from the French word Terrorisme. which is based on the Latin verb “terrere” (to cause to tremble).

Code § 2656f as "premeditated. These difficulties arise from the fact that the term is politically and emotionally charged." According to Matusitz (2013)...S.  It is both mala prohibitia (i.e.  It reaches more than the immediate target victims and is also directed at targets consisting of a larger spectrum of society. non-state actor. Terrorism is defined in Title 22 Chapter 38 U.  Legitimate targets in war. terrorism includes the following:  It is the use of violence or threat of violence in the pursuit of political. apprehend. crime that is inherently immoral or wrong). or undercover personnel serving on the behalf of their respective governments. The following criteria of violence or threat of violence fall outside of the definition of terrorism:  Wartime (including a declared war) or peacetime acts of violence committed by a nation state against another nation state regardless of legality or illegality that are carried out by properly uniformed forces or legal combatants of such nation states. politically motivated violence perpetrated against non combatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents. crime that is made illegal by legislation) and mala in se (i. or punish criminals who pose a threat to the lives of humans or property. religious. for example.  Reasonable acts of self-defence. such as the use of force to kill. ideological or social objectives. Page 8 of 33 . such as enemy combatants and strategic infrastructure that are an integral part of the enemy's war effort.  It can be committed by governments. In the United States of America.e.binding definition.

But in current scenario the terrorism scope has been increase. including the infliction of incidental damage to non- combatant targets during an attack on or attempting to attack legitimate targets in war. Sikh. Christian and Naxalite radical movements. viewpoint or opinion. In current scenario the domestic and external terrorist activities is increasing in India. In Indian concern for the terrorism. Central India (naxalism) and Seven Sister States (independence and autonomy movements). Mumbai. Religious terrorism is terrorism performed by groups or individuals. Terrorist acts throughout the centuries have been performed on religious grounds with the hope to either spread or enforce a system of belief. at least 232 of the country’s Page 9 of 33 . it is the main attribute of the terrorist activities in form of religious terrorism. Punjab and North East Frontier part was affected of terrorism. So we not called these freedom fighters as a terrorist but after 1947 the terrorism activities to kill the innocent people. The terrorist activities in India primarily attributable to Islamic. In early times the Kashmir. the Punjab insurgency led to militant activities in the Indian state of Punjab as well as the national capital Delhi. In the past. the motivation of which is typically rooted in the based tenets. The regions with long term terrorist activities today are Jammu and Kashmir.  Collateral damage. Recent incident of terrorist attack in India Since 1947 India got independence till that time. HISTORY OF TERRORISM IN INDIA Terrorism in India is started before India got independence on 1947 but that times terrorist activities aim create a fear among the British Ruler and not killed the general People. Hindu.

This data shows that after 1980. India has fought a war against the terrorism and in these wars we have lost more than 6000 people. we have lost more than 9000 security personnel.Coordinated series of attacks killing at least 170. Almost six lakh people in this country have become homeless as a result of terrorism.. Page 10 of 33 . In current situation there are as many as 800 terrorist organizations operating in the country. Anti-terrorism laws in India have always been a subject of much controversy. In addition. We have already lost more than 70000 civilians. Laws related to terrorism in India Terrorism has immensely affected India. The Indian Supreme Court took a note of it in Kartar Singh v.Series of seven bombs go off in trains killing 26 November 2008 to 29 November 2008 . at differing intensities. where it observed that the country has been in the firm grip of spiralling terrorist violence and is caught between deadly pangs of disruptive activities. The major incident of terrorist attack on India is 12 March 1993 . State of Punjab [1994] 3 SCC 569. The reasons for terrorism in India may vary vastly from religious cause and other things like poverty. by various insurgent and terrorist movements.Bomb goes off in a train in Mulund killing 10 29 October 2005 Delhi bombings 2005 Ram Janmabhoomi attack in Ayodhya 2006 Varanasi bombings 11 July 2006 .608 districts were afflicted. unemployment and not developed etc. the terrorist activities are increased in India.Series of 13 bombs go off killing 257 14 March 2003 .

The anti-terrorist laws have been enacted before by the legislature and upheld by the judiciary though not without reluctance. adjudication by a tribunal. There have been other anti-terrorism laws in force in this country a different points in time. The intention was not to make these drastic measures a permanent feature of law of the land. At present.One of the arguments is that these laws stand in the way of fundamental rights of citizens guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution. 1967 The UAPA was designed to deal with associations and activities that questioned the territorial integrity of India. the legislations in force to check terrorism in India are the National Security Act. 1967. The Act was a self- contained code of provisions for declaring secessionist associations as unlawful. the statutes have been reintroduced with requisite modifications. The Act has all along been worked holistically as such and is completely within the purview of the central list in the 7th Schedule of the Constitution. The measure laws are that Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. penalties for their members etc. control of funds and places of work of unlawful associations. The ambit of the Act were strictly limited to meeting the challenge to the territorial integrity of India. 1980 and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. The intention was to enact these statutes and bring them in force till the situation improves. But because of continuing terrorist activities. When TADA was enacted it came to be challenged before the Page 11 of 33 . Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act. 1987 (TADA) The second major act came into force on 3 September 1987 was The Terrorist & Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act 1987 this act had much more stringent provisions then the UAPA and it was specifically designed to deal with terrorist activities in India.

2002. application. 1999 (MCOCA) Other major Anti-terrorist law in India is The Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act. The Supreme Court of India upheld its constitutional validity on the assumption that those entrusted with such draconic statutory powers would act in good faith and for the public good in the case of Kartar Singh vs State of Punjab (1994) 3 SCC 569. The Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act. includes `promotion of insurgency' as a terrorist act. (2) It extends to the whole of India. Under the Maharashtra law a person is presumed guilty unless he is able to prove his innocence. However. commencement. FEATURES OF POTA 2002 CHAPTER I Preliminary 1. MCOCA mention organized crime and what is more.- (1) This Act may be called the Prevention of Terrorism Act. there were many instances of misuse of power for collateral purposes.Apex Court of the country as being unconstitutional. . Short title. For instance. the definition of a terrorist act is far more stretchable in MCOCA than under POTA. MCOCA does not stipulate prosecution of police officers found guilty of its misuse. This law was specifically made to deal with rising organized crime in Maharashtra and especially in Mumbai due to the underworld. TADA lapsed in 1995. The rigorous provisions contained in the statute came to be abused in the hands of law enforcement officials. 1999 which was enforced on 24th April 1999. Page 12 of 33 . duration and savings.

or (d) any investigation. or (b) any right. forfeiture or punishment incurred in respect of any offence under this Act. forfeiture or punishment as aforesaid. privilege. and (c) persons on ships and aircrafts. accrued or incurred under this Act. (6) Save as otherwise provided in respect of entries at serial numbers 24 and 25 of the Schedule to this Act. of which he is held guilty in India. wherever they may be. 2001 and shall remain in force for a period of three years from the date of its commencement. Page 13 of 33 . obligation.(3) Every person shall be liable to punishment under this Act for every act or omission contrary to the provisions thereof. wherever they may be. privilege. obligation or liability acquired. legal proceeding or remedy in respect of any such right. or anything duly done or suffered under this Act. liability. (5) The provisions of this Act apply also to— (a) citizens of India outside India. penalty. registered in India. but its expiry under the operation of this sub-section shall not affect— (a) the previous operation of. (b) persons in the service of the Government. it shall be deemed to have come into force on the 24th day of October. or (c) any penalty. (4) Any person who commits an offence beyond India which is punishable under this Act shall be dealt with according to the provisions of this Act in the same manner as if such act had been committed in India.

and. or detains any person and threatens to kill or injure such person in order to compel the Government or any other person to do or abstain from doing any act. CHAPTER II Punishment for. or injuries to any person or persons or loss of. death of.— (a) with intent to threaten the unity. forfeiture or punishment may be imposed as if this Act had not expired. explosive Page 14 of 33 . terrorist activities 3. or destruction of. or likely to cause. any State Government or any of their agencies. 1967 (37 of 1967). in such a manner as to cause. integrity. any such investigation. (b) is or continues to be a member of an association declared unlawful under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. ammunition. security or sovereignty of India or to strike terror in the people or any section of the people does any act or thing by using bombs. and measures for dealing with. Punishment for terrorist acts.- (1) Whoever. dynamite or other explosive substances or inflammable substances or firearms or other lethal weapons or poisons or noxious gases or other chemicals or by any other substances (whether biological or otherwise) of a hazardous nature or by any other means whatsoever. legal proceeding or remedy may be instituted. or damage to. or voluntarily does an act aiding or promoting in any manner the objects of such association and in either case is in possession of any unlicensed firearms. property or disruption of any supplies or services essential to the life of the community or causes damage or destruction of any property or equipment used or intended to be used for the defense of India or in connection with any other purposes of the Government of India. continued or enforced and any such penalty.

"a terrorist act" shall include the act of raising funds intended for the purpose of terrorism. abets. be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years but which may extend to imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine. shall. (4) Whoever voluntarily harbours or conceals. which is involved in terrorist acts.or other instrument or substance capable of causing mass destruction and commits any act resulting in loss of human life or grievous injury to any person or causes significant damage to any property. or attempts to harbour or conceal any person knowing that such person is a terrorist shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine: Provided that this sub-section shall not apply to any case in which the harbour or concealment is by the husband or wife of the offender. advises or incites or knowingly facilitates the commission of. or advocates. shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years but which may extend to imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine. (2) Whoever commits a terrorist act. (b) in any other case. be punishable with death or imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine.—For the purposes of this sub-section.— (a) if such act has resulted in the death of any person. commits a terrorist act. (5) Any person who is a member of a terrorist gang or a terrorist organisation. shall be punishable with imprisonment for a Page 15 of 33 . a terrorist act or any act preparatory to a terrorist act. Explanation. (3) Whoever conspires or attempts to commit.

4.term which may extend to imprisonment for life or with fine which may extend to rupees ten lakh or with both. Possession of certain unauthorized arms. shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to three years and fine. in a notified area. Page 16 of 33 . whether notified or not. etc. Explanation. (7) Whoever threatens any person who is a witness or any other person in whom such witness may be interested.- Where any person is in unauthorised possession of any— (a) arms or ammunition specified in columns (2) and (3) of Category I or Category III (a) of Schedule I to the Arms Rules. dynamite or hazardous explosive substances or other lethal weapons capable of mass destruction or biological or chemical substances of warfare in any area.—For the purposes of this sub-section. or any other person in whom the witness may be interested. (6) Whoever knowingly holds any property derived or obtained from commission of any terrorist act or has been acquired through the terrorist funds shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to imprisonment for life or with fine which may extend to rupees ten lakh or with both. or wrongfully restrains or confines the witness. 1962. "terrorist organisation" means an organisation which is concerned with or involved in terrorism. (b) bombs. with violence. he shall be guilty of terrorist act notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force. or does any other unlawful act with the said intent. and be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to imprisonment for life or with fine which may extend to rupees ten lakh or with both.

6. in relation to such person. 7.- (1) If any person with intent to aid any terrorist contravenes any provision of.—In this section. 1959 (54 of 1959). 1952 (20 of 1952) or the Arms Act. in the manner provided under this Chapter. any person who attempts to contravene or abets. shall be deemed to have contravened that provision. the Inflammable Substances Act. or any rule made under the Explosives Act. and the provisions of sub-section (1) shall. notwithstanding anything contained in any of the aforesaid Acts or the rules made thereunder. Powers of investigating officers and appeal against order of Designated Authority. the Explosive Substances Act.Explanation. rule or order. by notification in the Official Gazette. whether held by a terrorist or by any other person and whether or not such person is prosecuted or convicted under this Act. 1884 (4 of 1884). specify. Enhanced penalties. (2) Proceeds of terrorism.- Page 17 of 33 . "notified area" means such area as the State Government may.- (1) No person shall hold or be in possession of any proceeds of terrorism. shall be liable to be forfeited to the Central Government or the State Government. or does any act preparatory to the contravention of any provision of any law. he shall. have effect subject to the modification that the reference to "imprisonment for life" shall be construed as a reference to "imprisonment for ten years". (2) For the purposes of this section. as the case may be. 5. be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine. 1908 (6 of 1908). Holding of proceeds of terrorism illegal.

it shall be deemed to have been produced before the Designated Authority.(1) If an officer (not below the rank of Superintendent of Police) investigating an offence committed under this Act. has reason to believe that any property in relation to which an investigation is being conducted. (5) In the case of immovable property attached by the investigating officer. represents proceeds of terrorism. or of the Designated Authority before whom the properties seized or attached are produced and a copy of such order shall be served on the person concerned. (4) It shall be open to the Designated Authority before whom the seized or attached properties are produced either to confirm or revoke the order of attachment so issued: Provided that an opportunity of making a representation by the person whose property is being attached shall be given. (3) The investigating officer shall duly inform the Designated Authority within forty-eight hours of the seizure or attachment of such property. when Page 18 of 33 . he may. seize or attach such property. (2) For the removal of doubts. it is hereby provided that where an organisation is declared as a terrorist organisation under this Act and the investigating officer has reason to believe that any person has custody of any property which is being used or is intended to be used for the purpose of such terrorist organisation. he shall. make an order of attachment directing that such property shall not be transferred or otherwise dealt with except with the prior permission of the officer making such order. by an order in writing. with the prior approval in writing of the Director General of the Police of the State in which such property is situated. make an order seizing such property and where it is not practicable to seize such property.

and (e) Such other monetary instruments as the Central Government or. as the case may be. (b) It forms the whole or part of the resources of an organisation declared as terrorist organisation under this Act: Provided that the cash seized under this sub-section by the investigating officer shall be released not later than the period of forty-eight hours beginning with the time when it is seized unless the matter involving the cash is before the Designated Authority and such Authority passes an order allowing its retention beyond forty-eight hours. (b) Postal orders. (7) Any person aggrieved by an order made by the Designated Authority may prefer an appeal to the Special Court and the Special Court may either confirm Page 19 of 33 . Explanation.the investigating officer notifies his report and places it at the disposal of the Designated Authority. (d) banker’s drafts. the State Government may specify by an order made in writing.—For the purposes of this sub-section. (c) Traveller’s cheques. "cash" means— (a) Coins and notes in any currency. (6) The investigating officer may seize and detain any cash to which this Chapter applies if he has reasonable grounds for suspecting that— (a) It is intended to be used for the purposes of terrorism.

- (1) No order forfeiting any proceeds of terrorism shall be made under section 8 unless the person holding or in possession of such proceeds is given a notice in writing informing him of the grounds on which it is proposed to forfeit the proceeds of terrorism and such person is given an opportunity of making a representation in writing within such reasonable time as may be specified in the notice against the grounds of forfeiture and is also given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter. Issue of show cause notice before forfeiture of proceeds of terrorism. it may order forfeiture of such property. Page 20 of 33 .— (a) directing it to be sold if it is a perishable property and the provisions of section 459 of the Code shall. Forfeiture of proceeds of terrorism. if such person establishes that he is a bona fide transferee of such proceeds for value without knowing that they represent proceeds of terrorism. apply to the net proceeds of such sale. (2) No order of forfeiture shall be made under sub-section (1). is prosecuted in a Special Court for an offence under this Act. whether or not the person from whose possession it is seized or attached. 9. 8.- Where any property is seized or attached on the ground that it constitutes proceeds of terrorism and the Special Court is satisfied in this regard under sub- section (7) of section 7. (3) It shall be competent for the Special Court to make an order in respect of property seized or attached. as nearly as may be practicable.the order of attachment of property or seizure so made or revoke such order and release the property.

appeal to the High Court within whose jurisdiction. Appeal. should have woken the country to the problems being created by the use and misuse of the draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) but it evidently has not. is situated. 10.- (1) Any person aggrieved by an order of forfeiture under section 8 may.  Associations encourage us to appreciate others culture and moderate our aggressive instincts. who passed the order appealed against. MISUSE OF LAW The curious case of the Union Minister of State for Non-conventional Energy Sources. such person shall be paid the price therefor as if the property had been sold to the Central Government with reasonable interest calculated from the day of seizure of the property and such price shall be determined in the manner prescribed.(b) nominating any officer of the Central or State Government. to perform the function of the Administrator of such property subject to such conditions as may be specified by the Special Court. Page 21 of 33 . Kannappan. there is growth of individualism and an erosion of associational life. M. such property shall be returned to him and in either case if it is not possible for any reason to return the forfeited property. not sufficiently. within one month from the date of the receipt of such order. At any rate. the person against whom an order of forfeiture has been made under section 8 is acquitted. (2) Where an order under section 8 is modified or annulled by the High Court or where in a prosecution instituted for the contravention of the provisions of this Act. in the case of any other property. With modernity. the Special Court.

Ms. Kannappan has got only a respite. had argued that a ``mere speech'' in support of the LTTE (and presumably any other terrorist outfit) was not a ground for action under POTA. This. But Mr. For. is unable to do anything about it. the relevant section of the law is worded so loosely that it is virtually Page 22 of 33 . who has been languishing in prison for nearly 15 months. Vajpayee decides. In it she has asked Mr. Soon after Mr. for ``compelling political reasons. The Tamil Nadu Chief Minister. Jayalalithaa has added. for good measure.Mr. Vajpayee to drop Mr. Even so. Kannappan may thank his stars that he has not yet become a POTA detainee like the leader of his party. Kannappan from his Council of Ministers so that the State Government can take the necessary action against the latter under POTA for his ``open support'' to the banned LTTE. Whenever that happens and whatever Mr. But this did not pass muster in any of the POTA courts. the nettle will have to be grasped sooner or later. Atal Bihari Vajpayee's reply to her September 22 epistle. not reprieve. he and the country are bound to learn to their dismay that POTA. Jayalalithaa. is an ``anti-national act''. has held her hand only until she receives the Prime Minister. looks like turning into a classic case of the remedy being worse than the disease. Kannappan. once expected to be a panacea for the scourge of terrorism. there is no law that can prevent the Tamil Nadu Government from arresting Mr. the MDMK. that even if the Prime Minister. manifestly sympathetic to him. Vajpayee has referred Ms. Vaiko. Vaiko's arrest. Nor is it fair to blame special POTA judges. Jayalalithaa's letter to the Law Ministry and has again gone abroad soon after his return from an extended stay in Ankara and New York. Arun Jaitley. according to her. Mr. the Union Law Minister.'' cannot drop the Minister. The Union Government.

To the BJP Ministry in Jharkhand goes the dubious distinction of having arrested under POTA over 700 persons.impossible to escape its clutches. But the POTA court summarily rescinded Mr. How ironic it is that he should have been POTA's first victim in Tamil Nadu. Before ceasing to be Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh. Nobody knows why the safeguard of every POTA case being reviewed by a judicial board has also proved utterly ineffectual. The hyper-controversial POTA was opposed tooth and nail by the entire Opposition. Its misuse in some other States has been even more shocking because politicians in power there have found this extraordinarily harsh law to be the most convenient instrument to lock up their opponents. we seem to be moving ``from quota raj to POTA raj''. every single Tamil party represented in Parliament had voted for it. Vaiko being among its most eloquent champions. is not the only State groaning against POTA's improper use. In other States Tamil Nadu. Here a slight digression is called for. however. immediately released Raja Bhaiyya. Page 23 of 33 . Remarkably. Yadav's arbitrary order that was meekly carried out even before he was sworn in. had demonstrated this vividly in the notorious case of Raja Bhaiya. Mr. Mayawati. several of them schoolgirls whose parents are too poor to bail them out. As if to prove that provenance of action or inaction under POTA is political motivation. Ms. all civil rights organisations and an impressive array of legal luminaries. Mulayam Singh Yadav. According to a New Delhi wag. Mayawati's successor. It was rejected by the Rajya Sabha and was passed at a joint sitting of the two Houses.

Vajpayee's Council of Ministers to proclaim his sympathy for a monstrous terrorist organisation that has committed unspeakable crimes not only in Sri Lanka but also in this country? The assassination of the former Prime Minister. all except one of the POTA detainees are from the Muslim minority and in Tamil Nadu and UP too the ostensible anti-terror law has been abused to book. the Defence Minister. Gujarat's is a case apart.As in other cases so in this respect. without lucidity and accountability. Sadly. George Fernandez. was one of its barbaric acts. made the absurd statement that the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir had not been clearly defined — a standard Pakistani line that was demonstrably demolished during the Kargil War. is it proper for a member of Mr. Rajiv Gandhi. Only the other day. the infamous Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention (TADA) that was in force Page 24 of 33 . One painful question must be raised. A decade long experience with a previous national anti-terror law. Whatever the legal position. talking out of turn and utterly irresponsibly has become one of ministerial perquisites. In Gujarat. Here the Narendra Modi Government has invoked POTA against 123 Muslims arrested for the horrific Godhra outrage but not against any of the Hindus involved in the savage anti-Muslim pogrom that followed. a number of issues as to the possibilities of misuse of the provisions of the anti-terror law including the targeting of minorities and using it against political opponents had arisen. Would the Prime Minister please enforce some discipline on his wayward colleagues? IMPACT AND REPEAL Two years from the enactment of the POTA. political opponents and underprivileged communities respectively.

Special courts for trials are established under POTA which are given the discretion to hold trials in non-public places. even though being given under torture. which were contained in the Criminal Procedure Code. including the responses received by the POTA review committee show that the POTA is worse then TADA. The Act Page 25 of 33 . Section 32 provides that confessions made to police officers are to be admissible in trial. Under the TADA. the conviction rate was less than 1%. like prisons. this Section 48(2) could also be misused by the police by keeping an accused for long periods of detention without charge or trial. The provisions contained under the POTA were mostly contained in existing laws. which has increased the possibility of coercion and torture in securing confessions. despite the fact that the confessions made to the police.between 1985-1995 gives legitimacy to the fear that the misuse of such laws evoke among human rights activists. The developments after the enactment of the POTA. Section 4 of POTA is similar to Section 5 of TADA in laying out a legal presumption that if a person is found in unauthorized possession of arms in a notified area. political dissenters and minorities. POTA provides for criminal liability for mere association or communication with suspected terrorists without the possession of criminal intent (Section 3(5) of the POTA). Section 48(2) provides for the option of pre-trial police detention for up to 180 days. thus preventing the independent monitoring of special court sessions. the Evidence Act or the Constitution of India. where 98% of the cases never reached the trial stage. except those. and to withhold trial records from public scrutiny. the Indian Penal Code. he/she is automatically linked with terrorist activity. were admissible as evidence. As under the TADA.

2004 a 629-page report based on depositions made before the Tribunal by victims and their families from ten states in India. showed that such security legislations grant sweeping powers to authorities. such legislations do not address the political. At the same time. Moreover police officers can be prosecuted for abusing their authority. including opposition-ruled ones. Those opposed to POTA had argued that existing laws were sufficient to deal with terrorism. The tribunal stated Page 26 of 33 .effectively undermines the fundamental tenet of the criminal justice system by putting the burden of proof on the accused. had not hesitated to use POTA to fix political opponents. which were not attacked for being against human rights. These provisions stated that Confessions must be recorded within 48 hours before a magistrate. as well as expert depositions by lawyers and activists. But these provisions could not act as an effective shield to protect the Act from the criticism it received for its other provisions abusing human rights. State governments. The tribunal concluded that the review of victim and expert testimony showed that the misuse of the Act is inseparable from its normal use. Within a year POTA had already built up a dubious record and in some states it was already dreaded as its predecessor. The POTA also provided that victims could be paid compensation. Further a legal representative of the accused can be present for part of the interrogation. who will send the accused for a medical examination if there is a complaint of torture. At the Peoples Tribunal on POTA and Other Security Legislation at the Press Club in New Delhi on July 16. But the Act also had some provisions. social and economic roots of the problem. which has led to misuse of these powers and severe restriction of basic rights.

if the state so desires. There would be no arrests made after the ordinance is promulgated. attachment and forfeiture of proceeds of terrorism. He added. and working people. these may continue under other laws and charges. are: the onus on the accused to prove his innocence. adequate amendments were being brought to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. 2002 (POTA) and amend the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. Home Minister Shivraj Patil said that the government would provide a sunset period of one year during which all cases pertaining to POTA would be reviewed by the Central POTA Review Committee. compulsory denial of bail to accused and admission as evidence in the court of law the confession made by the accused before the police officer. after the repeal of the Act. The BJP government has slammed the Cabinet decision to repeal POTA as politically motivated and compromising of the essentials of national security. Thus the tribunal recommended that POTA be repealed and that too in such a manner that the POTA charges are deleted from all existing investigations and trials. which will be completely dropped in the amended Unlawful Activities Act. under the Unlawful Activities Act. including funding of terrorism. To fill the lacuna that have been created due to the repeal of the Act. 1967. All terrorist organisations banned under POTA would continue to remain banned. approved ordinances to repeal the controversial Prevention of Terrorism Act. etc. Finally on September 17. 1967 to define a terrorist act and provide for banning of terrorist organisations and their support systems. 2004 the Union Cabinet in keeping with the UPA government's Common Minimum Programme. Some of the clauses contained in POTA. But. BJP spokesperson and former Law Minister Arun Jaitley said if the Page 27 of 33 . religious minorities.that the statute meant to terrorise not so much the terrorists as ordinary civilians and particularly the poor and disadvantaged such as dalits. adivasis.

In 2009. which was a compilation of letters exchanged between Vaiko Page 28 of 33 . In 2009. The arrest of the MDMK leader was made today and he was produced before a magistrate and he did not furnish a bail bond. The case against him began after he release the book ‘Naan Kutram Sattugiren’ (I am accusing you). But till such a step is taken many innocent victims of the POTA can take a sign of relief and thank their stars that the reign of terror under the stringent anti.terror law POTA has come to an end. his travelling passport was also reportedly seized. Apart from that he has also been charged for inciting people to take part in violence. Following the arrest of Vaiko. a first information report (FIR) was lodged against Vaiko under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act. He in the same note said that there was nothing wrong in the joining of the youth in the armed struggle against the Sri Lankan army.amendments brought out under the existing laws after the repeal of POTA are found to be inadequate. After being presented before a magistrate he was sent to 15 days of judicial custody. the BJP-ruled states would be asked to come out with their own legislations filling up the lacuna. IMPORTANT CASES THE CASE OF VAIKO Tamil Nadu politician and Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (MDMK) party leader Vaiko was arrested on Monday on charges of sedition which was filed against him in 2009. He also reportedly made comments about ‘bloodbath’ in India if anything happened to the then leader of LTTE V Prabhakaran. when he said that India would not remain a united single country if the war against LTTE in Sri Lanka was not stopped. Chennai police registered a sedition case against Vaiko for his comment regarding the banned outfit Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).

Shaukat Hussain and Navjot Sandhu. Navjot Sandhu was acquitted of all charges except one under Section 123 of the Indian Penal Code (concealing with intent to facilitate design to wage war) — she was then sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment for five years. “Your husband is in jail We will kill you. Geelani was tortured in police custody and was branded as guilty by the media. His wife and children were illegally detained. Three of the accused including Geelani were handed the death penalty while. However.When Vaiko refused to be bailed and did not even file a bail application. He openly supports the idea of Kashmiri self-determination. His wife was told. the Delhi High Court set aside his conviction and acquitted Geelani on all charges — the court found there was Page 29 of 33 . of Kashmiri origin taught Arabic at a college in Delhi during the time of his first arrest.” After a relentless battle fought by his legal team. according to this earlier First post report However. The police charged Vaiko for his alleged seditious speech under Section 124(A) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).and former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in 2009. SAR GEELANI’S CASE Syed Abdul Rahman Geelani. Geelani was a suspect in the 2001 Parliament attacks along with Afzal Guru. You better tell him to come clean. which left the magistrate with only the option of sending the MDMK founder to judicial remand. We will kill the children. The TOI also reports that Vaiko appeared before XIII metropolitan magistrate Gopinath on Monday and filed a surrender petition. there was no sign of trial in the case after 2010. Geelani’s conviction led to a “massive legal and civic campaign”. claimed Outlook in an oped. The police reportedly conducted an investigation and filed a chargesheet against him in 2010.

He was not connected with the procurement of hideouts. former All Parties Hurriyat Conference chairman and leader of the fundamentalist Jamaat-e-Islami and his son-in-law were arrested under the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (Pota) in Kashmir. The raids were carried out at around 5 am on 8 June 2002 at the residences of Geelani. Speaking from the point of view of probabilities and natural course of conduct there is no apparent reason why Geelani would have been asked to join conspiracy. The arrests followed raids by the Indian Income Tax department and the Jammu and Kashmir police at Geelani's residence and nine other places in the Kashmir Valley and New Delhi. According to media reports. Geelani was arrested and has since been lodged in Central Jail. Two computers with details of transactions and list of Page 30 of 33 . There is no evidence of any participative acts in connection with or in pursuance of the conspiracy. $10. Geelani's arrest revealed the nexus between Kashmiri separatist leaders and Pakistan's ISI in receiving money through hawala channels and then distributing them to different militant organisations in Kashmir. SYED AL SHAH GEELANI’S CASE On 8 June 2002. been unable to arrest Indrabi who has since gone underground.000. Ranchi in Jharkhand to prevent him from continuing anti-national activities. vouchers relating to the purchase of large number of jewellery items and documents relating to the purchase of two properties in Rawalpora on Srinagar airport road. chemicals and other incriminating articles used by the terrorists.“no evidence to the effect that Gilani was maintaining personal or telephonic contacts with any of the deceased terrorists. his son-in-law Altaf Fantoosh. the raids at Geelani's led to the recovery of Rs 10.25000 in cash. women's separatist outfit Dukhtran-e-Millat chief Asiya Indrabi and another person in Srinagar and Baramulla in Jammu and Kashmir. Police have however.

40. a correspondent with a Kashmir-based daily has also been charged under the Official Secrets Act. The raids on Geelani's premises were carried out after Bazaz's interrogation and Page 31 of 33 . and said the house was on rent but did not specify the rent amount and to whom it was being paid to. G. another Kashmiri journalist. Baba also possessed a truck worth Rs. The latest raids were carried out after the Jammu and Kashmir police launched an operation to halt the funding sources of militant organisations in Kashmir. M. the approximate monthly expense of Geelani worked out to more than Rs. One diamond studded watch with the inscription "From Pakistan government" and two vehicles purchased out of unaccounted sources were also recovered from Geelani's residence. police in New Delhi arrested Iftikhar Geelani. Earlier on 25 May 2002. Imtiyaz Bazaz was arrested on charges of channelling funds to militant organisations from UK- based President of the World Kashmir Freedom Movement. in his returns filed in the last two years. However. son-in- law of Syed Ali Shah Geelani. 2.100 per month from the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly for being a former MLA and Rs 10. On 10 June 2002.000 per month for kitchen expenses.000 besides documents relating to mining contract business of stone quarries. Geelani's driver and close confidant.000.40.000 each.K. Baba has not been filing his income tax returns. 1. Ayub Thukar. Geelani's wife on interrogation revealed she was given Rs 25. Geelani. According to Jammu and Kashmir police chief. Geelani. Geelani also maintained 14 servants at his house who were paid Rs.000 as agriculture income. A.000 and a drilling machine worth Rs. 1.50.militants and secessionist propaganda literature were also recovered from Geelani house. Suri. Police and income tax officials raided Iftikhar Geelani's residence in New Delhi and seized a computer which had a file of five pages with information about the strength of troops of the Indian Army and paramilitary forces in Jammu and Kashmir. had shown he received a monthly pension of Rs 7.2.

In January 2002. we need not Page 32 of 33 .000 to Syed Ali Shah Geelani in the beginning of 2001 through Ayub Thukar. All these organizations must keep in mind that provisions are there in the constitution where reasonable restrictions can be enforced even upon the liberty of people and there is need to stringent law to tackle the terrorism. Even as proactive executive means of copying with terror( intelligence. Dukhtaran-e-Millat chief Asiya Indrabi's husband Qasim Faktu was arrested. We also need to bear in mind that much as terrorist keep apace with emerging technology. The mandate is particularly relevant in India on one hand it states identified as an emerging economic growth which is harassing it resource to take it appointed place in the heierachy of nation at the other hand its dramatic prograss it this direction is sought to be stymied by the enemies by carrying out repeated terror attacks right across the country. Asiya Indrabi had reportedly started getting funds from Ayub Thukar through Imtiyaz Bazaz to provide finances to the Jamiat-ul Mujahideen and the Dukhtaran-e-Millat for carrying out their militant and subversive activities. Salahuddin had reportedly sent a consignment totalling Rs. 48. which had been facing a financial crunch since then. CONCLUSION After reading the whole view. constitutional provisions.00. and equality before law and civil rights.reports indicating that Pakistan-occupied Kashmir-based supreme commander of Hizbul Mujahideen Syed Salahuddin had been sending money to his commanders in the state through UK-based Kashmiri expatriate Ayub Thakur and Geelani. Faktu was the financial chief of the Jamiat-ul- Mujahideen and his arrest was a severe blow to the militant organisation. organizational.the current phenomena being termed as fourth generation warfare and certainly India also need to fine tune and adopt their anti terror legislation to fought to the changing time. technical and human capital related) fall into place. Various suspicion and voices have been raised by people NGO's under the pretext of constitution.

So there is needed to make stringent law to tackle terrorism. Lord Denning said: “The freedom of individual must take second place to the security of the state”. Recently. no less a person than the Chief Justice of India said that the international community could not fault India if it chose to enact tough measures to deal with the menace of terror. Page 33 of 33 . In the view of the misuse of power.just law that tackle to terrorism but more important what new generation of people who must be educated an what it means to fight terror in a democratric set up. we can make develop a system to stop it misuse.