The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a criminal appeal seeking bail by an accused alleged to be involved in terror-related activities linked to the proscribed terrorist organisation Islamic State (ISIS), holding that there are prima facie grounds to believe the accusations and that the statutory bar under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA) squarely applies.
A Bench of Justice H.P. Sandesh and Justice Venkatesh Naik upheld the order of the Special NIA Court, which had earlier rejected the bail plea in and noted that the trial court had meticulously examined the material on record and correctly applied Section 43D(5) of the UAPA, which restricts the grant of bail where the court finds prima facie evidence supporting the allegations.
The appellant, arraigned as Accused No. 4, is facing charges under multiple provisions of the Indian Penal Code, the UAPA, and the Karnataka State Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property Act. The prosecution alleges that he was radicalised and recruited by a college mate (Accused No. 2) while studying at a college in Mangaluru and thereafter became an active participant in terror-related activities.
According to the National Investigation Agency (NIA), the accused was involved in reconnaissance and arson activities at various locations in and around Mangaluru, including incidents involving the burning of vehicles and a commercial establishment. These acts were allegedly aimed at waging war against the Government of India.
The NIA further alleged that the accused played a crucial role in terror financing, having shared cryptocurrency wallet details, received funds from an online handler referred to as “Colonel”, converted the funds into cash, and handed them over to co-accused persons. He was also accused of purchasing a two-wheeler using such funds for facilitating the conspiracy.
During his arrest in January 2023, investigators seized a mobile phone and storage devices from the accused. Forensic examination revealed images of critical infrastructure and sensitive locations, which the prosecution claimed were taken during reconnaissance missions. Digital material allegedly linked to arson activities and extremist propaganda was also recovered.
The trial court, in its detailed order, relied on both oral and documentary evidence, including forensic science laboratory (FSL) reports, to conclude that the accused was actively involved in furthering the objectives of a banned terrorist organisation.
The Bench noted that the accused appeared to be a close associate of other key accused persons, had received terror funds through cryptocurrency channels, and had participated in reconnaissance and arson activities. Taken cumulatively, these facts provided reasonable grounds to believe that the accusations were prima facie true.
The Court also took note that charges had already been framed and the trial had commenced, further strengthening the case against granting bail at this stage.
The prosecution relied on recent Supreme Court judgments, including Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India and Ram Kishor Arora v. Directorate of Enforcement, to emphasise the strict statutory framework governing arrests and bail in cases involving serious economic and terror offences. The High Court found no infirmity in the trial court’s approach in light of these rulings.
Concluding that no grounds were made out for interference, the High Court dismissed the criminal appeal and affirmed the rejection of bail.
Case Details
Case Title: Reeshaan Thajuddin Sheikh Versus NIA
Case No.: Criminal Appeal No.1548 Of 2025
Date: 2/01/2026
Counsel For Petitioner: Usman P, Advocate
Counsel For Respondent: P Prasanna Kumar, Spl. Pp
