HC sets aside terror-organisation charge against Dawood, upholds other charges

Section 20 UAPA charge quashed; prosecution to proceed under Sections 13 UAPA and 201 IPC

19/09/2026

JAMMU, Sep 18: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has partly allowed a petition filed by Dawood, 21, of Old FatehKadal, Srinagar, setting aside the charge framed against him under Section 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act while allowing the prosecution to proceed under Section 13 UAPA and Section 201 IPC.
Justice Rajesh Sekhri passed the judgment while deciding CRM(M) No. 889/2025, through which Dawood had challenged the August 23, 2025 order of the Special NIA Court, Jammu, framing charges against him under Sections 13 and 20 UAPA and Section 201 IPC.
The case arose from a February 7, 2024 attack on two non-locals in Srinagar. According to the prosecution, gunmen fired upon the two men, killing one on the spot, while the other later succumbed to his injuries. The case was initially registered at Police Station ShaheedGunj and subsequently taken over by the National Investigation Agency as RC-01/2024/ NIA/JMU.
The NIA alleged that Dawood was associated with other accused persons and was aware of their activities. It further alleged that, on the instructions of another accused, he collected a polythene bag connected with a parcel containing a pistol and magazines and shifted it from the spot.
Examining the Section 20 UAPA charge, the High Court observed that there was nothing on record to indicate that Dawood had committed or indulged in a "terrorist act" as contemplated under the Act.
The court noted that no covert or overt terrorist act had been attributed to him and held that the necessary ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 20 UAPA were absent. It consequently held the charge legally unsustainable and set it aside.
However, the High Court found sufficient material to sustain the charge under Section 13 UAPA. It noted that the prosecution material, including the statement of a protected witness and scientific evidence, disclosed a prima facie case against the petitioner.
The court also upheld the charge under Section 201 IPC relating to alleged destruction or disappearance of evidence. The prosecution alleged that Dawood had collected and shifted a polythene bag linked to the weapon parcel. The court noted that the bag was sent to the CFSL for comparison with a photograph available with investigators and that the forensic report was positive.
Accordingly, Justice Sekhri allowed the petition in part, setting aside only the Section 20 UAPA charge while maintaining the charges under Section 13 UAPA and Section 201 IPC. The Special NIA Court was directed to proceed with the trial in accordance with law.
The High Court clarified that its observations should not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and that the trial court would independently assess the evidence during the proceedings.
Senior Advocate A.M. Dar, assisted by Advocate Harish Sharma, appeared for Dawood, while Vishal Sharma, Senior Advocate/DSGI, Karan Sharma, CGSC, Chandan Kumar Singh, PP, and Ashwani Verma, PP, represented the NIA.

Photo Gallery

BSE Sensex

NSE Nifty