No HC reprieve for HuT leader & kin as plea for release rejected
The petition was moved by Ahmed Mansoor and his two sons -- Hameed Hussain and Abdur Rahman -- against their arrest by the Chennai Cyber Crime Police.
Madras High Court (File)
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Saturday refused to release a father and his two sons who were arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, and booked for allegedly plotting to overthrow the democratic government and establish Islamic rule.
While dismissing the petition seeking the release of the three detainees, a division bench of Justices SM Subramaniam and V Sivagnanam wrote: Since the grounds of their arrest was served in writing to the accused persons in the presence of their lawyer, their fundamental rights, enshrined under Article 22 (1) of the Constitution, was not breached by police.
The petition was moved by Ahmed Mansoor and his two sons -- Hameed Hussain and Abdur Rahman -- against their arrest by the Chennai Cyber Crime Police.
According to the police, Hameed Hussain is the leader of Hizb-ut- Tahrir (HuT), an organisation banned in several countries. Hameed lured Muslim youth through his YouTube channel to secretly implement Islamic rule in India by overthrowing the democratic government. His father and brother are alleged to be accomplices in Hameed’s conspiracy. All three were arrested in May under sections 34, 153B of IPC and Section 13 of UAPA.
The petitioners termed the arrests illegal, unconstitutional, and against the law laid down by the Supreme Court in 2024 Prabir Purkayastha Vs State case.
Advocate I Abdul Basith on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the grounds of the arrest, as contemplated under Section 43B of UAPA, were not served on the petitioners before their arrests. Citing that the Section 41A notice has not been issued by a competent authority, he sought the immediate release of his clients.
Additional Public Prosecutor E Raj Thilak on behalf of cybercrime police submitted that the procedures as contemplated were scrupulously followed while executing the arrests. The bench accepted the submission of the State that the fundamental rights of the petitioners were not breached and dismissed the petition.
