SUMMER INTERNSHIP PROGRAM 2020

STUDENT NAME – SHRUTI VERMA

ENROLLMENT NO. – 19FLICDDNO1121
BATCH NAME & YEAR – BBALLB(HONS) 2019- 24
PROJECT TITLE – UAPA (AMENDMENTS 2019)

SUBMITTED BY - SUBMITTED TO-

SHRUTI VERMA MS. PRIYA CHANANA

SCHOOL OF LAW
FACULTY OF LAW
ICFAI UNIVERSITY, DEHRADUN
2020
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would specially like to thank my guide, mentor, Ms. PRIYA CHANANA without whose
constant support and guidance this project would have been a distant reality.

This work is an outcome of an unparalleled infrastructural support that I have received from
ICFAI Law School, ICFAI University, Dehradun.

It would never have been possible to complete this study without an untiring support from my
family, specially my parents.

This study bears testimony to the active encouragement and guidance of a host of friends and
well-wishers.

Name: SHRUTI VERMA

Roll no: 19FLICDDNO1121
Batch: 2019-24
 CONTENTS

TOPIC PAGE NO.

 PROFILE 1

 ACKNOWLEDGMENT 2

CHAPTER I : BACKGROUND 4-6

CHAPTER II : AMENDMENTS 7-8

CHAPTER-III: ARGUMENTS 9-10

CHAPTER-IV: REPEAL UAPA ? 11

CHAPTER-V: CONCLUSION 12

BIBLIOGRAPHY 13
 CHAPTER I: BACKGROUND

 What is UAPA ?
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act is an Indian law that basically aims at the prevention of
unlawful activities associations in India. Its main objective was to give powers to the government to
deal with activities that are against the integrity and sovereignty of India.

The UAPA was first passed in 1967 on the recommendation of the National Integration Council,
after being tabled and withdrawn twice. The law came up in the backdrop of the 1962 China and
1965 Pakistan wars and in response to secessionist demands made by regional groups such as the
Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam.

UAPA 1967 enabled the government to impose ‘reasonable restrictions’ on the fundamental right to
association (Article 19)1 wherein The executive could declare any organization as unlawful and
designate and criminalize what it deemed as ‘unlawful activities’. Predictably, the history of the
UAPA can be traced back to British India. The term "unlawful association" was first used in the
Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908 to criminalize the Indian national movement.
Moving Ahead , The Parliament enacted UAPA in 1967. Prior to that, a resolution was passed by
National integration council headed by the prime minister. The NIC urged the Parliament that they
should frame a law to tackle unlawful activities and unlawful organisations. Based on these, Indian
Parliament enacted UAPA in 1967.
Objective behind enactment of UAPA was if there is an unlawful organisation ; ban it . Also
objective was to penalize and punish who are the members of this organisation and if a person funds
or supports them he too had to be punished.
Prior to the redesigning of UAPA, terrorist activities were primarily dealt with under the now
repealed Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (‘TADA’) and Prevention of
Terrorism Act, 2002 (‘POTA’). Over the years, a number of challenges have been made to the
constitutional validity of both TADA and POTA. These challenges were mainly on the ground that
the Union did not have the legislative competence to enact these laws. 
For instance, in Kartar Singh v.State of Punjab2, where in the appellant was a member of Amritsar
district motor Union, he took out a procession to protest against the policy of Punjab government to
nationalise motor transport where after a moment they started raising objectionable slogans against
the transport minister and the chief minister, which amounted to defamation and disturbed the public
order too , and were held untadaTADA .the validity of TADA was challenged on the ground that it
dealt with the issue of ‘public order’, which was within the legislative domain of states.
Nevertheless, the Court upheld the validity of TADA. The Court held that ‘public order’ covered

1
Constitutionality of 2019 Amendments to UAPA.

2
Indiankanoon.org
issues of lesser gravity and more serious threats covered in TADA fell within the Union’s domain
relating to national defence.
 The Court has scrutinized specific provisions of the above legislations on various occasions. For
instance, the Court in Sri Indra Das v. State of Assam3, wherein the appellant was charged for a
murder of a person along with five other people. He was alleged to have joined an organisation
ULFA. They said even assuming that the appellant was a member of ULFA which is a banned
organization, there is no evidence to show that he did acts of the objectionable nature . SC held that
even if he was a member of ULFA it has not been proved that he was an active member and not
merely a passive member. SC read down Section 10 of UAPA and Section 3(5) of TADA, both of
which made mere membership of a banned organization, criminal. The Court held that a literal
interpretation of these provisions would make them violative of Articles 19 and 21 of the
Constitution. This was in line with the previous decision in Arup Bhuyan’s case where the court had
held that ‘mere membership of a banned organisation will not make a person a criminal unless he
resorts to violence or incites people to violence or creates public disorder by violence or incitement
to violence’.

After 1967 these two major laws against terrorist act were repealed as these laws were misused and
were not needed.

 Objectives / Provisions

1. Declaration4 of an association as unlawful - If the central government is of the opinion that

any association is, or has become, an unlawful association ,it may, by notification in the
official gadget, declare such association to be unlawful.
2. Penalty for being members of an unlawful association- whoever is and continues to be a
member of an association declared unlawful shall be punishable with imprisonment for a
term of an year which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable for fine.
3. Penalty for dealing with funds of an unlawful organisation - any person found providing
funds to an organisation considered unlawful by the government would be punishable with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to n number of years or with fine or with both.

 Difference between unlawful activity and terrorist act

Unlawful Activity ( Sec 2(f))5 :  "unlawful activity", in relation to an individual or association, means
any action taken by such individual or association (whether by committing an act or by words, either
spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representation or otherwise),

That is, if a person commits an act which is against the integrity, unity and sovereignty of nation not
through arms or weapons but through words or actions, such person would be punished.
3
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1525571/
4
The continuing threat Of India’s unlawfully prevention Act to free liberty.

5
Sec 2(f) – Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967.
What constitutes a terrorist act (Sec. 15): Whoever, with intent to threaten the unity, integrity,
security or sovereignty of India or to strike terror in the people or any section of the people in India
or in any foreign country, does any act by using bombs, dynamite or other explosive substances or
inflammable substances or firearms or other lethal weapons or poisons or noxious gases or other
chemicals or by any other substances (whether biological or otherwise) of a hazardous nature, in
such a manner as to cause, or likely to cause, death of, or injuries to any person or persons or loss of,
or damage to, or destruction of, property or disruption of any supplies or services essential to the life
of the community in India or in any foreign country or causes damage or destruction of any property
or equipment used or intended to be used for the defence of India or in connection with any other
purposes of the Government of India, any state government or any of their agencies, or detains any
person and threatens to kill or injure such person in order to compel the government in India or the
government of a foreign country or any other person to do or abstain from doing any act, commits a
terrorist act.

That is , if a person acts against the unity, integrity and sovereignty of nation through arms and
weapons leading to death and injury to individual and destruction of property it is a terrorist act and
UAPA will punish such individual.

 PUNISHMENT UNDER UAPA ,1967

Section 13 in The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967

. Punishment for unlawful activities.—

(1) Whoever—

(a) takes part in or commits, or

(b) advocates, abets, advises or incites the commission of, any unlawful activity, shall be punishable with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

(2) Whoever, in any way, assists any unlawful activity of any association declared unlawful under section 3,
after the notification by which it has been so declared has become effective under sub-section (3) of that
section, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or
with both.

(3) Nothing in this section shall apply to any treaty, agreement or convention entered into between the
Government of India and the Government of any other country or to any negotiations therefor carried on by
any person authorised in this behalf by the Government of India
 CHAPTER II: AMENDMENTS

The UAPA has been amended on multiple occasions to incorporate the changing techniques of
terrorism, from shifting the burden of proof to making extra-territorial arrests. 
It has been amended seven times till now. The Amending Acts are as follows:

1. The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Act, 1967

2. The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1972
3. The Delegated Legislation Provisions (Amendment) Act, 1986
4. The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Act, 2004
5. The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Act, 2008
6. The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Act, 2012
7. The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Act, 2019

Till 2013 , UAPA dealt with –

 Unlawful Activity
 Terrorist Act

The 1967 UAPA talked about only unlawful activities and unlawful organisation. If any individual
committed unlawful activity the law will punish him. If an organisation is unlawful the central
government will ban it by giving it notice.

Later , scope of UAPA was expanded by letting it cover terrorist act as well. Now, if the central
government believed that an organisation is terrorist they will ban the organisation.

Although the Act has been in force since 1967, the Parliament only inserted a dedicated
Chapter towards punishing terrorist activities in 2004 by way of the UAPA Amendment Act,
2004 (Chapter IV). Thereafter, amendments were made to the legislation in 2008 and 2013 as well.

The most recent amendment has been done in 2019. According to the statement of objects and
reasons, the Bill amends the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 to make it more effective in
preventing unlawful activities, and meet commitments made at the Financial Action Task Force (an
intergovernmental organization to combat money laundering and terrorism financing).
 AMENDMENTS TO UAPA(2019)6
1. Who may commit terrorism: Under the Act, the central government may designate an
organisation as a terrorist organisation if it: (i) commits or participates in acts of terrorism,
(ii) prepares for terrorism, (iii) promotes terrorism, or (iv) is otherwise involved in terrorism. 
The Bill additionally empowers the government to designate individuals as terrorists on the
same grounds.  The act empowers the central government to designate an individual a “
terrorist” . if he is found committing, preparing or promoting or is otherwise involved in an
act of terror. the government is not required to give an individual the opportunity to be heard
before such a designation.
2. Approval for seizure of property by NIA: Under the Act, an investigating officer is
required to obtain the prior approval of the Director General of Police to seize properties that
may be connected with terrorism.  The Amendment adds that if the investigation is conducted
by an officer of the National Investigation Agency (NIA), the approval of the Director
General of NIA would be required for seizure of such property..
3. Investigation by NIA: Earlier ,Under the Act, investigation of cases may be conducted by
officers of the rank of Deputy Superintendent or Assistant Commissioner of Police or above. 
The Amendment additionally empowers the officers of the NIA, of the rank of Inspector or
above, to investigate cases. In other words , Initially, UAPA law specified that only officers
of the rank of deputy superintendent or assistant commissioner of police of the NIA shall
have the power to investigate offences under the UAPA laws. The 2019 act allows NIA
officers of Inspector rank to carry out the investigations.

6
What is UAPA and why arrests under it are so problematic?
 CHAPTER III: ARGUMENTS

 Arguments in FAVOUR-:
1. Masood Azhar Case – Earlier our country was pleading before leading countries like France ,
UK , China to help us so that United Nations security council (UNSC) declares Azhar as
global terrorist . But Instead of helping, they questioned Country’s law as why can’t India
itself declares him the terrorist but it was not possible as the country did not had any law to
declare an individual as terrorist until this 2019 amendment of UAPA came.
2. Individuals floating to new Organisations – Earlier the people involved in a terrorist
organisation used to shift or form any other similar organisation if earlier one gets banned by
the government because of which the vicious circle continued to operate but with the new
amendment the law can ban those people too apart from banning the organisation.
3. Lone Wolf – Those people who do not belong to some unlawful or terrorist organisation but
still commit Such an act , could be banned and punished with these latest amendments of
UAPA.
4. Deterrent – The strong amendment punishes the terrorist in a manner that their properties are
confiscated ,can be put behind bars , ban on travel etc. It would act as a very strong deterrent
and prevent future acts.
5. If organisation,why not Individual – Organisations are formed by these individuals. These
unlawful or terrorist acts are committed by those individuals , so we can ban the organisation
why can’t we ban the individual who create such organisation.
6. UN/US examples – United Nation and other super powers of the world like US have such
laws which declares an individual as terrorist and bans them so why should India lag behind.

 Safeguards ~ for those declared as terrorist as per UAPA

1. If an application filed by an individual is rejected by the government, the bill gives him
the right to seek a review within one month after the application is rejected.
2. Under the act , the central government will set up the review committee consisting of a
chairperson ( a retired or a sitting judge of high court ) and three other members . the
review committee will be empowered to order the government to delete the name of the
individual from the schedule that lists “terrorist”, if it considers the order to be flawed.
3. Apart from these two avenues, the individual can also move to the court challenging the
government’s order.

 Arguments in AGAINST :-

1. An official designation of a person as terrorist will be akin to civil death with social
boycott, expulsion from job, hounding by media and perhaps attacks from self-
proclaimed rigilant groups. In short, the government can declare anybody as a terrorist
 without following any judicial procedure and throw him to mob to suffer extra judicial
punishment.
2. Amended law has allowed the state to encroach upon the fundamental rights of dignity,
free speech ,dissent and reputation. UAPA Amendment Act , 2019 , conferred upon the
centre “ discretionary, unfettered and unbound powers “ to declare a person a terrorist. the
law could be used by the state to bring disrepute to a person and even worse , rob him/her
of Liberty. The heavy burden to prove the state machinery wrong rested with the person.
3. The right to reputation is an intrinsic part of the fundamental right to live with dignity
under article 21 of the constitution and tagging an application of judicial mind does not
amount to compliance with the “ procedure established by law7”.
4. the new Amendment is contrary to the principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ and also
violates the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1967which recognizes
the mentioned principle as a universal human right.
5. it is being used to repress rather than combat terrorism since the amendment provides that
designation of an individual as a terrorist would not lead to any conviction or penalties.
6. no objective criterion has been laid for categorization, and the government has been
provided with “unfettered powers” to declare an individual as a terrorist.

7
https://www.scobserver.in/court-case/association-for-protection-of-civil-rights-v-union-of-
india
 CHAPTER IV: SHOULD WE REPEAL WHOLE UAPA?

1. If unlawful activity is banned under UAPA, innocent individuals can also get detained as the
term unlawful activity is very vague. For example , a student or a media person influencing
other people to protest against the government for their policies regarding some unjustified
law.
2. Whoever is a member of unlawful organisation is said to be banned but who comes under the
“member” and who doesn’t is not clearly defined which includes whole everything . It goes
against the verdict of supreme court in 2011 ( Indira Das Vs state of Assam) 8 , supreme court
made it clear if any individual possesses the literature of unlawful organisation which is
banned ,who participates in meeting of such organisation, cannot be declared as the member
of organisation . Only if he insights people to violence then can be called as member of such
organisation.
3. Denial of bail or anticipatory bail ( Sec 43(D)(v) of UAPA) – If police presents a charge
sheet or case diary, judiciary can be convinced prima facie individual is guilty , hence no bail
should be given. This UAPA is against human rights it criminalises dissent in the country.
Hence ,case study is enough for state to declare an individual guilty but how can judiciary go
by the arguments of state and deny the Liberty ,freedom, life guaranteed by article 21 of
constitution to accused.

UAPA empowers the parliament to restrict the rights and freedoms of citizens to protect ‘the
sovereignty and integrity of India’. The Government contended that the amendment was brought
because it is the individuals who commit the terrorist acts and having power only to designate
organizations as terrorist organizations would be of no use because those individuals could continue
their activities under a different name. But the issue still remains whether the parliament under any
circumstance can classify the individual as terrorist only because it believes him to be involved in
terrorism without any trial or whatsoever. The RSS itself in 1992 had been declared unlawful under
UAPA but individual members were not arrested on solely being a part of the organization. 

8
https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2020/06/bhandari-pokhriyal-uapa-
 CHAPTER IV: CONCLUSION

The government has clearly misused its powers , as the new amendments clearly have more cons
than pros. These laws are vaguely worded and overly broad and have been used as political tools
against critics showing a movement towards “thought-crimes.” The legislature in realizing the
purpose of this Act has restricted individuals from their human rights. The Amendment also violates
the mandate of Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights. The above arguments have pointed out how the amendment puts fundamental rights
of its citizens in peril and threatens the mere existence of the person standing in opposition. Under
the guise of such laws, the government has booked journalists doing their jobs ,human rights activists
, students and citizens fighting for their rights and justice. 

When such horrendous legislation violates and takes away the rights of citizens, it becomes the duty
of the Supreme Court to step in and restore faith in democracy. This Amendment reflects the
intention with which laws were made under the colonial regime in order to curb several freedom
movements under the veil of ensuring public order. The Act mainly criminalizes acts on the basis of
‘ideology’ and ‘association’. Thus, it can be seen that the above are the signs of moving from
democracy to autocracy. And therefore to establish fair democracy in the country and let citizens use
their fundamental rights properly , these amendments should be removed or altered.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

 Books : The pearson guide to the CLAT by Harsh Gagrani.

 Articles:

1. Constitutionality of 2019 Amendments to UAPA.

2. The continuing threat Of India’s unlawfully prevention Act to free liberty.
3. What is UAPA and why arrests under it are so problematic?

 Websites:
1. https://www.scobserver.in/court-case/association-for-protection-of-civil-
rights-v-union-of-india.
2. https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2020/06/bhandari-pokhriyal-uapa-
3. Indiankanoon.org

*********