Supreme Court Declines First Instance Hearing on UAPA Amendments

The Supreme Court declined to hear challenges against UAPA amendments, directing the Delhi High Court to address the matter first. Petitioners argue the 2019 amendments infringe on fundamental rights and advocate a more thorough review by high courts. Concerns include potential misuse and impacts on individuals' reputation and rights.

The Supreme Court, asserting it cannot be a 'court of first instance,' has refused to hear pleas challenging amendments to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) that enable the government to classify individuals as terrorists and seize their assets.

A bench led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna urged that these complicated legal matters be addressed initially by the Delhi High Court instead. The bench suggested that other high courts could consider new petitions challenging UAPA amendments, emphasizing the necessity of high courts' initial evaluation.

Petitioners, including Sajal Awasthi and the Association for Protection Of Civil Rights, argue that the amendments infringe on fundamental rights. Senior advocate C U Singh highlighted logistical challenges for petitioners, many of whom are retired bureaucrats, in accessing multiple courts. The amended provisions, criticized for potentially curbing dissent and imposing travel bans unjustly, are debated for their constitutionality and impact on personal freedoms.