The Crossbill News Desk
The Supreme Court of India on Thursday (March 12) granted bail to senior Hurriyat leader Shabir Ahmed Shah in a case related to alleged terror funding and secessionist activities in Jammu and Kashmir.
The relief came during the hearing of his appeal against an earlier order that had refused him bail.
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta allowed Shah’s plea while examining his challenge to the June 12, 2025 order of the Delhi High Court, which had denied him bail in a case registered by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), The Indian Express reported.
According to the prosecution, Shah allegedly played a key role in encouraging separatist activities in the region. Investigators claimed that he facilitated militant or separatist movements by instigating members of the public to raise slogans supporting secession and by publicly praising slain militants as “martyrs”.
He was also accused of receiving funds through hawala channels and mobilising money through trade across the Line of Control (LoC), which was allegedly used to support militant activities.
The prosecution argued that the case arose from an alleged conspiracy involving several accused individuals who were engaged in promoting secessionist activities in the region through violent protests and other unlawful actions. These activities allegedly included inciting the public to violence, organising protests that turned violent, stone pelting at security forces, burning of schools, damaging public property and acts aimed at waging war against the Union government.
“Their ultimate aim and objective was to seek the secession of the J&K from the Union of India, all in the garb of ‘Freedom’,” the prosecution claimed, reported the paper.
Appearing for Shah, senior advocate Colin Gonsalves along with advocate Satya Mitra argued before the court that the Hurriyat leader was “very sick” and had spent nearly 38 years of his political life behind bars. They submitted that Shah had been diagnosed with prostate cancer and serious kidney complications and required the support of family members for his care and daily needs.
His medical condition had also drawn attention earlier in the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly, where M. Y. Tarigami of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and other members urged the government to shift Shah to Kashmir so that his family could look after him.
Opposing the bail plea, senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, appearing for the NIA, argued that the accusations against Shah were serious and claimed that he had been in contact with militant groups and their leaders based in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir.
During the hearing, the bench raised concerns over the prolonged delay in the case and the length of Shah’s custody. After hearing both sides, the court told the NIA: “Delay is one aspect that you cannot explain. Forget about who was responsible for the delay. But he continues to be in custody.”
The relief came during the hearing of his appeal against an earlier order that had refused him bail.
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta allowed Shah’s plea while examining his challenge to the June 12, 2025 order of the Delhi High Court, which had denied him bail in a case registered by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), The Indian Express reported.
According to the prosecution, Shah allegedly played a key role in encouraging separatist activities in the region. Investigators claimed that he facilitated militant or separatist movements by instigating members of the public to raise slogans supporting secession and by publicly praising slain militants as “martyrs”.
He was also accused of receiving funds through hawala channels and mobilising money through trade across the Line of Control (LoC), which was allegedly used to support militant activities.
The prosecution argued that the case arose from an alleged conspiracy involving several accused individuals who were engaged in promoting secessionist activities in the region through violent protests and other unlawful actions. These activities allegedly included inciting the public to violence, organising protests that turned violent, stone pelting at security forces, burning of schools, damaging public property and acts aimed at waging war against the Union government.
“Their ultimate aim and objective was to seek the secession of the J&K from the Union of India, all in the garb of ‘Freedom’,” the prosecution claimed, reported the paper.
Appearing for Shah, senior advocate Colin Gonsalves along with advocate Satya Mitra argued before the court that the Hurriyat leader was “very sick” and had spent nearly 38 years of his political life behind bars. They submitted that Shah had been diagnosed with prostate cancer and serious kidney complications and required the support of family members for his care and daily needs.
His medical condition had also drawn attention earlier in the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly, where M. Y. Tarigami of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and other members urged the government to shift Shah to Kashmir so that his family could look after him.
Opposing the bail plea, senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, appearing for the NIA, argued that the accusations against Shah were serious and claimed that he had been in contact with militant groups and their leaders based in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir.
During the hearing, the bench raised concerns over the prolonged delay in the case and the length of Shah’s custody. After hearing both sides, the court told the NIA: “Delay is one aspect that you cannot explain. Forget about who was responsible for the delay. But he continues to be in custody.”
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment