Delhi High Court Denies Bail in Espionage Case, Citing National Security Concerns
High Court Rejects Bail in Espionage Case Involving Indian Army Secrets
On 22 May 2025, the Delhi High Court denied bail to Mohsin Khan, accused in a major espionage case concerning the transfer of classified information about the Indian Army to Pakistan. The court emphasized the gravity of the offence, stating that it impacted the sovereignty and integrity of India, and could not be treated with leniency.
The case was registered under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 by the Delhi Police Crime Branch in 2021, following intelligence alerts about a spy syndicate operating across Delhi, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh.
Court’s Observations: Security Over Individual Liberty
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, in her judgment, stated that the case involved national security, and thus could not be treated as a routine matter of bail. She observed:
“The offence is not merely one against an individual or group, but an offence against the very integrity, sovereignty, and security of Bharat.”
She further noted that India’s security and military preparedness were endangered by such acts, which cannot be equated with conventional crimes like murder or theft. These were crimes of betrayal against the country, the court remarked.
Link with Pakistan High Commission and Spy Network
The FIR revealed that certain individuals, including Mohsin Khan, were in direct or indirect contact with Pakistani intelligence officials, notably Rana Muhammad Qasim Zia from the Pakistan High Commission in Delhi.
On 11 July 2021, secret input indicated that one Habibur Rehman, based in Pokhran, Rajasthan, was to supply classified documents related to the Indian Army to Pakistan. Acting swiftly, the Delhi Police apprehended Rehman on 12 July 2021 near Diatra, Bikaner Highway.
He was found with highly confidential Indian Army documents, later verified as authentic by the Army Headquarters, Sena Bhawan, Delhi. Investigations showed that Rehman used Mohsin Khan as a conduit to pass these documents and facilitate payment transfers.
Financial Links and Syndicate Operations
The court noted that Mohsin Khan was unable to explain:
-
His regular communication with Habibur Rehman and Rana Muhammad Qasim Zia.
-
His financial transactions with Paramjeet Kumar and several money forwarding agents.
-
His role in transferring payments related to classified leaks.
These factors established a prima facie role in a larger espionage syndicate, which, according to the court, could not be ignored or downplayed.
.jpg)
National Security Cannot Be Compromised
Justice Sharma underscored the idea that citizens sleep peacefully because the armed forces remain ever-vigilant. Any breach of military confidentiality, whether for financial gain or ideological reasons, amounted to betrayal and posed a direct threat to national security.
She remarked:
“The ramifications of such offences are far-reaching – they compromise military preparedness and threaten the sovereignty of the State.”
Hence, granting bail to an accused involved in such activities would set a dangerous precedent and diminish the seriousness with which espionage is viewed.
Anti-National Activities Under Indian Law: Constitutional & Legal Framework
Contrary to popular discourse, the term "anti-national" is not explicitly defined in the Indian Constitution. However, several laws govern activities that threaten the unity, integrity, and sovereignty of India.
Under the Constitution:
-
Article 19(2) allows the state to impose reasonable restrictions on the freedom of speech and expression in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, public order, and state security.
-
Article 22 provides certain safeguards for preventive detention but recognizes the state's right to act in national security matters.
Relevant Laws:
-
Official Secrets Act, 1923:
Deals with espionage and disclosure of confidential information detrimental to the state.
Used in the current case against Mohsin Khan. -
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA):
Criminalizes activities that threaten the sovereignty and integrity of India.
Often invoked in cases involving terrorism and foreign interference. -
Indian Penal Code (IPC) [now replaced by Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS)]:
Anti-National Offences Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which replaced the colonial IPC, does not define “anti-national” but incorporates provisions related to treason, espionage, and threats to sovereignty under various clauses.
Relevant Sections in BNS include:
-
Clause 150 (Acts endangering sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India):
Punishes any person who incites or attempts to incite secession, armed rebellion, or subversive activities against the state. -
Clause 113 (Waging war against the Government of India):
Addresses activities akin to sedition or war against the state, including acts of spying, betrayal, or supplying military secrets to enemy states. -
Clause 118 (Espionage):
Directly penalizes unauthorized communication or transmission of sensitive information prejudicial to the nation’s security.
Conclusion
The Delhi High Court’s refusal to grant bail in this case reinforces the judicial view that national security is paramount, especially when individuals are accused of leaking classified military documents to foreign agents. While personal liberty is a constitutional right, it cannot override collective national interest when the sovereignty of the country is under threat.
The case stands as a reminder that in the digital age, espionage can take many forms, but the laws of India are well-equipped to respond decisively.
Comments
Post a Comment