NEW DELHI: Questioning the NIA for referring to certain alleged inflammatory speeches of Kashmiri separatist leader Shabir Ahmed Shah made in the 1990s, the Supreme Court on Wednesday pointed out that these were not new speeches made by him.
"These speeches are not a new creation. These are something which were already there, say 30 years or 35 years before today. Now, you recover them in 2019 and say that these are the inflammatory speeches," said the bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta.
The National Investigation Agency (NIA), however, told the bench that there were materials, including inflammatory videos and incriminating e-mails, against Shah.
As senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for the NIA, referred to some transcripts of videos, the bench asked about the date of the speeches.
Luthra replied that the agency had the dates for some of the videos and they were from the 1990s.
The bench posted the matter for further hearing to March 12 when senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, for Shah, would advance his rejoinder arguments.
In the terror funding case, accused, Shabir Ahmad Shah, had earlier in one of its hearings, claimed before the Supreme Court that he was not named in the main chargesheet or the first supplementary chargesheet and was added only in the second supplementary chargesheet in the case and sought bail.
The Supreme Court heard the detailed arguments on Shah’s bail plea under the UAPA charges with the defence citing prolonged incarceration and the NIA opposing relief while seeking time to file additional documents.
Shah was alleged to have played a "substantial role" in facilitating a separatist movement in Jammu and Kashmir by inciting and instigating the general public to sloganeering in support of the secession of J-K. It was also alleged that he played a key role in paying tribute to the family of slain terrorists or militants by eulogising them as "martyrs"; receiving money through hawala transactions and raising funds through LoC trade.
Senior advocate Collin Gonsalves, appearing for Shah, had earlier submitted to the top court that his family was not given the detention order and he seeks series of detention orders passed since 1970.
The NIA had earlier -- while vehemently opposing the bail plea of Kashmiri Separatist leader Shah's bail plea, accused in a terror funding case -- had objected before the Supreme Court to the use of words by him of "Indian State and Jammu and Kashmir", instead of "India".
Strongly opposing the bail plea, Luthra submitted that Shah was arrested in the present case in 2019 while he was already in custody in the ED case. Luthra argued that the case involved allegations of funding street protests that disrupted the administration and claimed that protected witnesses had stated that Shah recommended candidates for medical seats in Pakistan, which were reserved for Kashmiri students.
Dismissing all the charges, Gonsalves countered that all the allegations were already contained in the main chargesheet in which Shah was not named.
