Hyderabad: The Telangana high court recently dismissed a criminal appeal filed by three accused in the sensational Popular Front of India (PFI) terror module case. The appeal challenged the validity of the prosecution sanction granted against the accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).The case was registered by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) on charges that the accused were radicalising local youths in Nizamabad, organising terror camps, and recruiting youth for terror acts. The NIA alleged that the accused were radicalising gullible Muslim youth and recruiting them into PFI through speeches filled with hatred against the govt of India, as well as other organisations and individuals. The module was initially busted by the Telangana police in 2022, following which NIA took up the investigation.Three of the eleven accused – Abdul Khadar, Shaik Shadullah, and Mohammed Imran – who were chargesheeted by the NIA, moved the high court challenging the prosecution sanction granted in Dec 2022. Their counsel argued that the order was mechanical, lacked reference to independent review, and failed to show application of mind by the sanctioning authority. They sought that the entire sanction file be summoned and examined before charges were framed.Opposing the appeal, special public prosecutor for NIA, P Vishnuvardhan Reddy, argued that the sanction validity can only be tested during the trial and not at the pre-trial stage. “The appellants are attempting to delay the framing of charges. The trial court rejected the appellants’ application in June 2025, holding that such issues could be raised at the stage of trial,” Reddy informed the court.Upholding the trial court’s order, the bench of Justice K Lakshman and Justice BR Madhusudhan Rao observed that the sanctioning authority considered the investigation report, list of documents, and witness statements before granting approval. An independent authority also reviewed the material and recommended sanction. Moreover, there is no evidence to show that relevant material was withheld or that the authority failed to apply its mind, ruled the bench.While disposing of the matter recently, the bench also noted that challenges to sanction under UAPA can be raised at the trial stage with supporting evidence but cannot be used as a pre-trial tactic to stall proceedings. The bench concluded that the trial court acted correctly and dismissed the appeal.
