The Rajasthan High Court has recently approved bail for two individuals suspected of being affiliated with Sikhs for Justice (SFJ). They were accused of inscribing the slogan "Khalistan Zindabad" on a wall in a public area within the Hanumangarh district of the state.

Significantly, the Court remarked that it found it "incomprehensible" how the penal provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act were applied to the accused individuals. Additionally, the Court noted the absence of compelling circumstances to warrant a presumption of guilt against the accused.

In light of this, a bench headed by Justice Farjand Ali provided relief to the accused individuals, Lovepreet Singh and Harmanpreet Singh. The bench emphasized the likelihood of a prolonged trial and deemed it unnecessary to keep the accused petitioners incarcerated any further.

The accused, who are originally from Punjab, were charged under various sections, including 153-A (pertaining to the promotion of communal disharmony), 153-B (related to imputations or assertions prejudicial to national integration), and 505 (involving statements conducing to public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Additionally, they were booked under Sections 10(A) (entailing penalty for being a member of an unlawful association) and 13(1)(A) (involving punishment for unlawful activities) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), as well as Section 66-F (pertaining to punishment for cyber terrorism) of the Information Technology (IT) Act.

In its ruling, the High Court extensively cited the Supreme Court's recent judgment in the case of Javed Ahmad Hajam vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. In this case, the Supreme Court had dismissed a criminal case against a professor for his WhatsApp status criticizing the abrogation of Article 370, which he described as a 'Black Day' for Jammu and Kashmir.

The High Court granted bail to the accused contingent upon them providing a personal bond worth Rs. 50,000/- along with two sureties, each valued at Rs. 25,000/-. These sureties are to be furnished to the satisfaction of the trial Judge, ensuring the accused's appearance before the concerned court on all scheduled hearing dates.

Case title - Lovepreet Singh and Another vs. State of Rajasthan [S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1510/2024]