The Bombay High Court on Thursday dismissed a plea challenging the constitutional validity of several provisions of the stringent anti-terror law, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

Upholding the law’s validity, the division bench of Justice A.S. Gadkari and Justice Neela Gokhale said the petition failed in its challenge.

The plea was filed by Anil Baburao Baile, who was issued a notice in 2020 in connection with the Elgaar Parishad case, and who claimed that the anti-terror law and the now-repealed sedition law were unconstitutional.

After he was sent a notice, Baile moved the Supreme Court to challenge the validity of the UAPA. In February, the top court directed the High Courts to proceed with pleas challenging the various provisions of the anti-terror law.

Additional Solicitor General and advocates Sandesh Patil and Chintan Shah, appearing for the anti-terror central agency NIA, opposed the plea, stating that Baile was only named as a witness in the chargesheet, and that a challenge to the UAPA’s provisions would arise only if the petitioner had been unjustly affected by it.

"Hence without there being any cause of action the present petition raising constitutional validity is filed before this Hon'ble Court," NIA's counsel responded.

"Cause of action will arise only when the provisions of the UAPA Act which were implemented shall give rise to civil or
evil consequences to the petitioner. It is well settled that a Writ Court would not determine a Constitutional question in
vacuum," the NIA's counsel further added.

Source: India Today