The Supreme Court upheld the denial of bail to the accused under the NDPS Act and UAPA, emphasizing the stringent conditions of Section 43D(5) of UAPA, which restricts bail if prima facie evidence suggests guilt. The Court ruled that circumstantial evidence, witness statements, and transnational conspiracy allegations met the threshold for continued detention, despite no direct recovery of contraband. The accused’s role in facilitating smuggling, foreign links, and risk of witness tampering justified rejecting bail. However, the Court allowed liberty to seek bail after six months or substantial trial progress, balancing personal liberty (Article 21) with national security concerns. The judgment clarified that terror financing charges were premature without further evidence.
Facts Of The Case:
The case involves Harpreet Singh Talwar @ Kabir Talwar, accused in a high-profile narcotics smuggling operation linked to Afghan-based syndicates. The National Investigation Agency (NIA) registered FIR No. RC-26/2021 after the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) seized 2,988.21 kg of heroin concealed in talc stone consignments at Mundra Port, Gujarat (December 2020). Talwar was implicated as Accused No. 24, allegedly controlling M/s Magent India, a front firm used to import heroin-laced talc from Afghanistan via Iran.
Investigations revealed Talwar’s meetings in Dubai with key conspirators, including Raju Dubai, a foreign national overseeing the smuggling network. He allegedly facilitated the consignment’s clearance by providing fake documents and instructing associates to create backdated records. Protected witnesses testified about his role in the conspiracy under the NDPS Act and UAPA. Though no heroin was recovered from his consignment, the NIA argued it followed the same modus operandi as later seized shipments.
Talwar was arrested in August 2022 after searches uncovered incriminating documents and call records linking him to co-accused. The Special Court and Gujarat High Court denied bail, citing Section 43D(5) of UAPA, which bars bail if prima facie evidence exists. The Supreme Court upheld the decision, noting the transnational nature of the crime, witness tampering risks, and Talwar’s financial influence, but permitted a fresh bail plea after six months.
Procedural History:
The procedural history of the case began with the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) registering Case No. DRI/AZU/GRU/NDPS-01/2021 in early 2021 following the seizure of 2,988.21 kg of heroin at Mundra Port, Gujarat. The National Investigation Agency (NIA) later took over the case, filing FIR No. RC-26/2021/NIA/DLI on 23 September 2022 under the NDPS Act and UAPA.
Harpreet Singh Talwar was arrested on 24 August 2022 and named as Accused No. 24 in a supplementary chargesheet filed on 20 February 2023. He first sought bail before the Special NIA Court, Ahmedabad, which rejected his plea on 30 July 2023, citing a prima facie case under NDPS/UAPA and flight risk concerns.
Talwar then approached the Gujarat High Court, which dismissed his bail application on 28 March 2024, upholding the statutory bar under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA. The High Court emphasized the gravity of the offence, witness safety, and transnational implications.
On appeal, the Supreme Court heard the matter and delivered its judgment on 13 May 2025, upholding the bail denial but allowing Talwar to renew his plea after six months or substantial trial progress. The Court directed expedited witness examination and sought a sensitive witnesses list from the NIA, while clarifying that terror financing allegations remained unproven at this stage.
Court Observation:
The Supreme Court made several critical observations while upholding the denial of bail to Harpreet Singh Talwar. The bench emphasized that Section 43D(5) of UAPA creates a statutory bar against bail when there’s prima facie evidence of involvement in serious offences. The Court noted that while no contraband was directly recovered from Talwar’s consignment, the circumstantial chain of evidence – including his meetings in Dubai, creation of front companies, document manipulation, and telephonic coordination with co-accused – sufficiently established his alleged role in the narcotics smuggling network under both NDPS Act and UAPA provisions.
The Court observed that the transnational nature of the crime, involving Afghan-origin heroin routed through Iran, and the sheer scale of the operation (with seizures valued at ₹21,000 crore) justified stringent considerations. It specifically noted that the modus operandi of using legitimate trade channels mirrored across multiple consignments, indicating an organized criminal conspiracy. The bench also expressed concern about witness safety, particularly given the suspicious death of one witness and two others becoming untraceable, finding this a valid consideration against granting bail.
However, the Court clarified that while charges under UAPA’s terror financing provisions were invoked, there was insufficient evidence at this stage to directly link the accused to terrorist organizations. It balanced these findings with Article 21 considerations, allowing the accused to renew his bail plea after six months if trial progress remained inadequate, thus safeguarding against indefinite detention while prioritizing the integrity of the judicial process. The judgment underscored that bail analysis in such cases requires examining the totality of circumstances rather than isolated evidentiary gaps.
Final Decision & Judgement:
The Supreme Court dismissed Harpreet Singh Talwar’s bail appeal while laying down a balanced approach for future consideration. In its final judgment dated 13 May 2025, the bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh ruled that the statutory restrictions under Section 43D(5) of UAPA and the gravity of allegations justified continued custody at this stage. The Court held that the prosecution had established a prima facie case of conspiracy through circumstantial evidence, including Talwar’s overseas connections, creation of shell entities, and attempts to fabricate documentation – even in the absence of direct narcotics recovery from his consignment.
However, recognizing protracted incarceration concerns under Article 21, the Court permitted Talwar to renew his bail plea after six months or upon substantial trial progress, whichever occurred earlier. The judgment mandated expedited trial proceedings, directing the Special Court to conduct hearings twice monthly and the NIA to identify sensitive witnesses. Crucially, the Court delinked terror financing allegations from the current proceedings, noting insufficient evidence to sustain such grave charges at this preliminary stage. This nuanced verdict thus balanced national security imperatives with constitutional safeguards against indefinite detention, while preserving the evidentiary sanctity of the ongoing trial.
Case Details:
Case Title: Harpreet Singh Talwar @ Kabir Talwar vs. The State of Gujarat through National Investigating Agency (NIA) Citation: 2025 INSC 662 (Supreme Court of India) Criminal Appeal No.: (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 8878/2024) Date of Judgment: 13th May 2025 Bench (Judges): Justice Surya Kant & Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh
Download The Judgement Here