The Bombay High Court has cancelled dismissed police officer Sachin Waze’s bail in the Antilia explosives and Mansukh Hiran murder case, setting aside a special NIA court order that had found no prima facie terrorist act and directing that the prosecution proceed under the legal standards applicable to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
A division bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Neela Gokhale described the special court’s reasoning as “egregiously flawed” and its findings as “perverse” in an 88-page judgment. The High Court said the lower court had failed to examine the chargesheet and the settled legal parameters governing bail under the anti-terror law.
The case relates to the discovery in February 2021 of a vehicle containing explosives and a threat note near industrialist Mukesh Ambani’s residence in Mumbai. The vehicle belonged to Mansukh Hiran, whose subsequent murder also forms part of the prosecution case. According to the material discussed by the High Court, the vehicle was allegedly presented as stolen, its number plates were replaced, and it was parked outside the Ambani residence with explosives inside.
The High Court said the investigation had produced strong prima facie material linking Waze to the alleged offences. It said the alleged actions were intended to create fear among members of the public through a bomb scare, after which Waze could present himself as a protector of wealthy industrialists and extort money from them.
The judgment recorded that the alleged conduct involved an attempt to create the impression that the incident had been carried out by a terror outfit. The court said this circumstance, as reflected in the investigation material, indicated an alleged intent to generate fear. It also rejected the argument that the absence of detonators meant that UAPA provisions could not be invoked.
The special NIA trial court had granted Waze bail on September 29, holding that an offence involving a “terrorist act” was not prima facie evident. The National Investigation Agency challenged that order, arguing that the trial court had not considered the chargesheet in its proper perspective. Waze had also argued that the lack of detonators weakened the terrorism-related allegations.
The High Court said the UAPA requires bail to be refused when there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation is prima facie true. Once that threshold is met, the appropriate judicial response is to prioritise and expedite the trial rather than grant bail in disregard of the statutory mandate, it said.
The court further held that Waze’s five years of pre-trial incarceration could not, by itself, justify bail in a case carrying a possible sentence of life imprisonment. It said the special judge had wrongly treated the degree of satisfaction required at the stage of framing charges as higher than the standard applicable to bail.
The High Court also criticised the alleged conduct because Waze was a police officer, a position that required him to protect citizens’ rights. It said the course of justice could not be obstructed and that the accusations were supported prima facie by substantive material and evidence.
The cancellation of bail keeps Waze in custody while the prosecution continues in the connected explosives, alleged terror conspiracy and Mansukh Hiran murder proceedings. The High Court’s order makes the trial process and the application of the UAPA’s bail restrictions the next formal steps in the case.
