The Supreme Court on Friday overruled its 2011 judgments in Arup Bhuyan vs State of Assam, Indra Das vs State of Assam and State of Kerala vs Raneef which held that mere membership of a banned association is not sufficient to constitute an offence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 or the Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, unless it is accompanied with some overt violent reported Livelaw. in.
A bench comprising Justices MR Shah, CT Ravikumar and Sanjay Karol also upheld Section 10(a)(i) of the UAPA which makes membership of an association, which has been declared to be unlawful, to be an offence.
The 2011 judgment in Arup Bhuyan was delivered by a 2-judge bench comprising Justices Markandeya Katju and Gyan Sudha Mishra while deciding a bail application under TADA filed by a person accused of being a member of ULFA.
“Mere membership of a banned organisation will not make a person a criminal unless he resorts to violence or incites people to violence or creates public disorder by violence or incitement to violence”, the bench had held.
Earlier, in State of Kerala vs Raneef(2011), while deciding a bail application under the UAPA, the same bench had taken the same view. Same view was taken in Indra Das too by the same bench.
In 2014, a 2-judge bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra and AM Sapre referred the matter to a larger bench, after the Union Government filed an application seeking reference on the ground that the interpretation was given to the central legislations without hearing the Union.
The 3-judge bench commenced hearing the reference on February 8 and reserved the judgment on next day, after hearing Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, Senior Advocate Sanjay Parikh (for an intervenor NGO).