The Delhi High Court's decision on Friday to deny interim bail to O.M.A Salam, chairman of the now-banned Popular Front of India (PFI), has marked a significant development in the ongoing legal battle surrounding the organization. Salam, who was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in connection with a case against the PFI and its members, had sought a temporary release on medical and personal grounds.

Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Amit Sharma, who heard the plea, determined that Salam had not provided adequate grounds to justify the interim bail. Salam’s request was predicated on his claim that he needed to attend to his wife, who is in a depressive state following the death of their daughter in April. Despite these personal hardships, the bench ruled that the legal criteria for granting interim bail were not met.

Salam's arrest was part of a larger crackdown by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in 2022, which targeted the PFI amid allegations of the group's involvement in terrorist activities. The NIA charged that the PFI was engaged in fundraising for terrorism, organizing training camps, and indoctrinating its members. The government officially banned the PFI and several of its affiliated organizations on September 28, 2022, citing links with global terrorist groups like ISIS and a purported threat to national security. This ban is set to last for five years under the UAPA.

In addition to his bail plea, Salam has challenged the NIA’s investigation procedures. His counsel argued that the NIA should only investigate scheduled offenses as defined under the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, and that the Delhi Police should have been responsible for the initial registration of the offense. They also contended that the NIA should obtain permission from the Central Government before proceeding with such investigations.

Justice Saurabh Banerjee has agreed to a joint request from both parties to list this matter for further hearing on October 31. Earlier in February, Justice Jasmeet Singh had issued a notice to the NIA, acknowledging that the Delhi Police should have initially registered the offense, which has added another layer of complexity to the case.

The ongoing legal proceedings highlight the broader tensions between state security measures and individual rights. As the case develops, it will continue to draw attention from legal experts and the public alike, given the high-profile nature of the PFI’s ban and the serious allegations levied against its members.