The bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Amit Sharma emphasised that phrases like “with intent to strike terror” and “by any other means of whatever nature to cause or likely to cause” in the UAPA definition reflect the statute’s preventive intent.
Related Posts
Mamata Banerjee Alleges BJP Added Fake Voters with EC’s Help, Threatens Indefinite Protest
West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee accused the BJP of adding fake voters from other states to the electoral rolls with the Election Commission’s help. […]
Meerut Restaurant Serves Roasted Chicken To Astrologer’s Vegetarian Family, Uproar Ensues
Several religious organisations in Meerut expressed strong disapproval over this incident and have claimed that there was a conspiracy. They also demanded separate kitchens for […]
Gold Jewellery Worth Rs 5 Lakh, Donated To Temple Hundi By Devotee, Goes Missing; Here’s What Happened
Previous allegations of missing items, such as rice and dal offered by devotees, have surfaced. Higher authorities are concerned about the need to replace both […]