ARBITRARY INVOCATION OF UAPA

The counsel would like to make three-fold submissions before the honorable
court to prove that the state has arbitrarily invoked UAPA provisions and
detained the petitioners without valid grounds.
The first submission deals with arbitrary invocation of section 10 of UAPA act,
1967 and the detention of the petitioner.
The second submission deals with arbitrary invocation of section 13, 16 and 18
of UAPA act, 1967.
The final submission deals with the legality of the detention made by the
investigative agencies.
With the permission of your lordship, the counsel would like to proceed with
the first submission.
Invocation of section 10 is not justified because: -
1) There has been no official notification in the official gazette that has
declared the association to be illegal. Therefore, there has been non
compliance of section 3(1) of UAPA, 1967.
2) Mere association does not taint the member with illegality until and
unless the member has contributed towards the illegal object of the
association. This has been held in the case of Elfbrandt V Russel
Based on the aforementioned statements, the counsel would like to clarify that
the literal interpretation of section 10 will criminalize those members who have
not contributed to the offence in any way and thereby violating the
fundamental rights of the individual. This is backed by the case of Elfbrandt V
Russel quoted in the case of state of Kerala V Raneef.
[those who join an organization but do not share its unlawful purpose and who
do not participate in its unlawful activities surely pose no threat, either as
citizens or as public employees……. A law which applies to membership without
the ‘specific event’ to further the illegal aims of aims of the organization
infringes unnecessarily on protected freedoms. It rests on the doctrine of ‘guilt
by association’ which has no place here]
Therefore, it is clear that the invocation of section 10 of UAPA, 1967 is not only
arbitrary in nature but also violative of fundamental rights of the petitioner.
[article 19- freedom of movement]

If your lordship is convinced with the argument advanced, the counsel would
like to proceed to the second submission.
Section 13 deals with punishment for unlawful activities, section 16 deals with
punishment for terrorist act and finally section 18 deals with the punishment
for conspiracy. The underlying factor of invocating sections is that they are
attempting to punish a non-existent offence.
The petitioner has merely conveyed his opinion on the contemporary issue of
same sex marriage through the interview. The proposition contained only an
excerpt from the interview to substantiate the possibility of inflammatory
statement and the given excerpt is not inflammatory in any manner in the
perspective of a prudent man. The possibility that the riots was caused by the
interview does not make any logical sense as there was no statement that can
be construed as inflammatory in nature.
To conclude, the sections invoked by the state will not apply to the petitioner
as they lack any rationale behind such invocation.

If your lordship is convinced with the argument advanced, the counsel would
like to proceed to the final submission.
The final submission solely deals with the legality of the detention. For better
understanding it is essential to understand the definition of detention.
Detention refers to reserving a person or property and such act can be
performed in pursuant of a government order or under valid grounds of
suspicion. The act cannot be performed arbitrarily as held in the case of Bhim
Singh v state of Jammu and Kashmir wherein an MLA was detained for no valid
reason and the court held that there has been violation of article 19 as the act
curtailed the right of liberty of movement without sound justification.
In the current scenario the petitioner is facing a similar predicament as he has
been detained under arbitrary invocation of section 10, 13, 16 and 18 of UAPA,
1967. Such act is violative of fundamental rights and also proves that the state
has used the statute arbitrarily.

PRAYER