NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has denied bail to Moirangthem Anand Singh, who was arrested by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in connection with a transnational conspiracy allegedly orchestrated by Myanmar-based leadership of terror outfits to wage war against the Government of India by exploiting the ongoing ethnic unrest in Manipur.
A bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Amit Sharma, while pronouncing the order on Wednesday, observed that the allegations against Singh were of a grave nature, involving offences with far-reaching consequences for public order and national security.
As per reports, Singh is a former cadre of the banned insurgent group, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) of Manipur. He has a history of multiple arrests, having been taken into custody in 1997, 2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, and 2009. Subsequently, he joined the Kangleipak Communist Party (Noyon) Group and was arrested again in 2010 by Lamphel Police Station, following which he was detained under the National Security Act (NSA).
Singh, who was arrested in September 2023, had challenged the impugned order dated August 24, 2024, in the High Court by which his bail application had been dismissed by the Special NIA Court.
The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), through an order dated September 21, 2023, had transferred the case from the Manipur Police to the NIA, New Delhi, after widespread protests erupted demanding Singh’s unconditional release.
However, advocate M Gunedhor Singh, appearing for the accused, argued that the allegation of a transnational conspiracy was not supported by any credible evidence.
“There is no evidence placed on record to explain how the alleged incident of being caught in camouflaged attire along with weapons relates to a transnational conspiracy as claimed by the NIA,” he contended.
His counsel maintained that no admissible evidence or direct admission by the appellant established his membership in the PLA. However, Special Public Prosecutor Rahul Tyagi, representing the NIA, strongly opposed the bail plea.
“The prima facie case under Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) is clearly made out, considering the grave circumstances under which the appellant was arrested. He was apprehended wearing camouflaged attire and in possession of weapons looted from the state armoury,” Tyagi submitted. The court took note of the developments that unfolded in the days following Singh’s arrest, highlighting his influence in the region.
“The manner in which such a serious law and order situation was created to seek his release itself demonstrates the power he wields in the area,” the court observed. Dismissing the bail plea, the bench underscored that the nature and gravity of the allegations were severe.