The Rajasthan High Court ruled on Saturday to deny bail to five individuals implicated in the murder of Kanhaiya Lal Teli in Udaipur, referencing Mahatma Gandhi’s assertion that “terrorism and deception belong to the weak, not the strong.”
A panel comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Agrawal and Justice Sameer Jain rejected the bail requests from Wasim Ali (34), Muslim Khan (43), Mohsin Khan (27), Mohammad Mohsin (34), and Asif Hussain (25). The court emphasized that the severe nature of the crime, the specific roles of the accused within a broader criminal conspiracy, and the atrocious character of the acts rendered them ineligible for bail.
Kanhaiya Lal Teli was killed on June 28, 2022, by Mohammed Riyaz Attari and Ghouse Mohammad, who reportedly entered his shop disguised as customers. The murder stemmed from Teli’s social media post supporting Nupur Sharma, a BJP spokesperson suspended for her controversial remarks about the Prophet Muhammad during a televised debate.
The court also referenced a poem by Ramdhari Singh Dinkar concerning tolerance, stating, “The role of a judge is heavy with the responsibility of safeguarding the rights of citizens as guaranteed by the Constitution of India.”
Further, the court articulated that the context of bail shifts significantly in cases where the crime targets the very essence of the nation, asserting: “Terrorism transcends a mere physical attack; it symbolizes a deliberate assault on a nation’s psychological sovereignty. Its aim is not only to commit a crime but also to undermine peace, supplanting the ‘Rule of Law’ with the ‘Rule of Fear.’”
The National Investigation Agency (NIA) has already filed a charge sheet, and the trial court has formulated charges against the five accused in 2024. They have remained in judicial custody since their arrests shortly after the murder. Previous bail applications submitted to a Special Court were rejected in October and November 2024.
Representatives for the accused, including Syed Saadat Ali and others, argued that there is insufficient evidence to prove that their clients were present at or near the victim’s shop during the critical period from June 10 to June 28, 2022. Additionally, they claimed there was no proof indicating that the accused sent any messages or communications that could be interpreted as offensive to any religious community or inciting hostility.
Furthermore, they pointed to bail being granted to two other individuals, Farhad Mohammed and Mohammed Javed, by both the trial court and the High Court under similar charges as those against the current appellants. They highlighted that the defendants have already spent over four and a half years in custody, noting that the trial process would likely take considerable time, despite the charge sheet being filed on August 22, 2022, and charges being framed in early 2024.
Representing the NIA, senior counsel Raja Thakare stated that the five accused played a crucial and active role in the alleged crime. He cited a Supreme Court ruling, asserting that the court is not required to conduct a detailed examination of evidence at the bail stage, but must instead consider the material provided by the investigative agency at face value. If the evidence presents reasonable grounds to believe the accusations are prima facie valid, bail should be denied.
The High Court noted that the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act imposes a legal restriction on granting bail if the court finds reasonable grounds to believe the allegations are prima facie true based on the charge sheet. It acknowledged that the NIA has conducted a thorough investigation, completed the charge sheet, and that the trial court has framed charges, indicating sufficient material exists for proceeding against the accused at this stage.
However, the High Court clarified that its remarks were intended solely for the bail determination and that the trial court should carry on with the proceedings without being swayed by the observations made in this ruling.
Hamza Khan serves as a Correspondent for The Indian Express, focusing on the politically vibrant and diverse state of Rajasthan. Based in Jaipur, he provides in-depth coverage on governance, legal issues, and social matters, aligning with the publication’s commitment to courageous journalism.
