close_game
close_game

HC seeks Centre’s reply on pleas against UAPA

Mar 11, 2025 08:16 AM IST

The court asked the law officer to raise the issue of locus in the affidavit and posted the matter on May 15

The Delhi high court on Monday directed the Union government to respond to a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, or UAPA.

Besides FMP’s plea, the court was also dealing with petitions challenging the provisions of the anti-terror law, transferred from the Supreme Court. (HT Archive)
Besides FMP’s plea, the court was also dealing with petitions challenging the provisions of the anti-terror law, transferred from the Supreme Court. (HT Archive)

“Let reply/affidavit be filed on behalf of the Union of India. List on May 15,” a bench of chief justice DK Upadhyay and justice Tushar Rao Gedela said in its order.

The Centre represented by additional solicitor general (ASG) Chetan Sharma submitted that the plea filed by Foundation for Media Professionals (FMP), to the extent of its challenge to section 10 of the UAPA, was not maintainable since the Supreme Court had “buried” the issue by upholding the validity of the provision in 2023. The ASG also questioned the locus of the FMP.

Section 10 of the UAPA criminalises mere membership in an unlawful association.

The court asked the law officer to raise the issue of locus in the affidavit and posted the matter on May 15.

“You can raise the locus of the association when you file the affidavit. Challenge is not only limited to section 10 but also others. You file your affidavit…. We’ll keep it open to you to take up preliminary objections not only on the aspect of maintainability but also other grounds,” the bench said.

Besides FMP’s plea, the court was also dealing with petitions challenging the provisions of the anti-terror law, transferred from the Supreme Court. On February 4, the top court had transferred the pleas filed by Sajal Awasthi, Association for Protection of Civil Rights and Amitabha Pande, to the high court, remarking that it could not be a court of first instance.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE ON
SHARE
Story Saved
Live Score
Saved Articles
Following
My Reads
Sign out
New Delhi 0C
Thursday, May 08, 2025
Follow Us On