SC grants bail to TADA accused in 2 arms landing cases of Guj

One of the key accused in two separate arms and RDX landing cases lodged in 1993 under stringent TADA in Gujarat today got bail from the Supreme Court after remaining in jail for over 12 years.
The bench comprising Justices S A Bobde and L Nageswara Rao enlarged Umarmia alias Mamumia, arrested on December 10, 2004 after evading arrest since 1993, on various grounds including the fact that prior approval under Section 20A (1) of Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, now repealed, was not taken from the district superintendent of police for lodging the FIRs.
Mamumia is one of the key accused in a case relating to landing of RDX on Gosabara coast of Porbandar in 1993 and the explosives were allegedly used in serial bomb blasts in Mumbai in the same year.

The second FIR pertained to seizure of explosive materials, RDX boxes, 45 bags of weapons at Zaroli and Dhanoli villages of Valsad district in Gujarat. The accused had fled to Dubai after the case came to light.
The apex court overturned the orders of the designated TADA court declining bail to the accused in the two cases and considered the fact that he was "suffering incarceration for more than 12 years" and only 25, out of 192 witnesses, have been examined in the trial.
"This court has consistently recognised the right of the accused for a speedy trial. Delay in criminal trial has been held to be in violation of the right guaranteed to an accused under Article 21 of the Constitution of India," it said.

Referring to various judgements, it said accused can be granted bail under the stringent TADA also if "they have been in jail for a long period of time and there was no likelihood of the completion of the trial at the earliest".

The court, however, asked the accused to remain confined to Porbandar and "report daily to the City 'B' Division Police Station, Porbandar at 6:00 PM" and asked him to surrender his passport.
"If the appellant is required to attend any court outside Porbandar the same may be done through video conferencing to be organised by the state," it said, adding the state may move the court for cancellation of bail if accused is found to be tampering with the evidence or causing hindrance to the progress of the trial.

It, meanwhile, asked the TADA court "expedite and complete the trial at the earliest".