90% acquitted: SC flags poor conviction rate in UAPA cases
What's the story
The Supreme Court has expressed concern over the low conviction rates in cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA), noting that over 90% of such trials end in acquittals. A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan made these observations while granting bail to a Kupwara resident accused in a narco-terrorism case. The accused, Syed Iftikhar Andrabi, had been in custody since June 2020.
Statistics cited
'Staggering 99% chance of acquittal in J&K'
The court referred to National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) statistics from 2019 to 2023, which showed that the all-India conviction rate in UAPA cases was between 1.5% and 4%. This translates to a 94-98% chance of acquittal at trial's end. In Jammu and Kashmir, the conviction rate was even lower: below 1%, indicating a staggering 99% possibility of acquittal for undertrial UAPA accused in the region.
Court
94%-98% possibility of acquittal in such cases in country
"For the five years from 2019 to 2023, the all-India figures show that the rate of conviction minimum is 1.5% and the maximum is 4%, whereas in the case of Jammu and Kashmir, the rate of conviction in 2019 was zero, and the maximum was in 2022 at 0.89%." "Therefore, for...all-India figures, we have 2% to 6% convictions, meaning thereby that there is a 94% to 98% possibility of acquittal in such cases in the country," the court said.
Speedy trial
Right to speedy trial extended to UAPA accused
In the same judgment, the Supreme Court also emphasized the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. It questioned the correctness of another bench's judgment in January denying bail to activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the larger Delhi riots larger conspiracy case. In the case of Gulfisha Fatima v. State, a division Bench of the Supreme Court had denied Khalid and Imam bail while granting bail to other accused in the same case.
Bail
Right to speedy trial even for UAPA accused
The court, in its January 2026 verdict, found that Khalid and Imam stand on a different footing than other defendants. However, Justices Nagarathna and Bhuyan on Monday observed that this decision diluted a bigger, three-judge bench verdict in Union of India v. KA Najeeb. In the Najeeb ruling, the court held that the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 would apply even to the UAPA accused and that such people cannot be kept in jail indefinitely as undertrials.
Court
'Bail is the rule'
"We have no manner of doubt in stating that even under the UAPA, bail is the rule and jail is the exception," the court said. "A smaller Bench cannot dilute, circumvent, or disregard the ratio of a larger Bench. If a smaller Bench cannot agree with a larger Bench, it can only refer the case to the Chief Justice of India for allocation to a larger Bench," it said.