After Over Five Years in Custody, Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Mohd Shahzad Kamal
Court sets aside 2024 bail rejection, noting the prolonged incarceration and unlikely completion of trial in the near future
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has granted bail to Mohd Shahzad Kamal, an undertrial accused in a National Investigation Agency case, after he spent more than five years in custody.
A division bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Arun Bhardwaj, in its judgment pronounced on October 1, 2026, set aside the May 29, 2024 order of the Special NIA Court that had rejected Kamal’s bail plea.
Kamal has been in custody since August 31, 2021. He is accused in NIA Case No. 3 of 2019, arising from an investigation into an alleged conspiracy involving Harkat Ul Harb E Islam, which the prosecution describes as affiliated with ISIS.
According to the NIA, Kamal was allegedly involved in arranging and providing funds for terrorist activities. The agency also relied on communications recovered from electronic devices, including alleged Facebook and WhatsApp conversations, as part of its case. These allegations will be examined during the trial.
The High Court took note of the prolonged period of incarceration and the fact that the trial involves 161 prosecution witnesses. The court observed that the trial was unlikely to conclude in the near future and considered whether continued incarceration for an indefinite period would be consistent with the accused’s constitutional rights.
The court also considered the legal principles concerning prolonged incarceration and the right to a timely trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. It referred to recent Supreme Court observations concerning the relationship between Article 21 and the stringent bail provisions under the UAPA.
While considering the prosecution’s material, the High Court examined the alleged electronic communications and the role attributed specifically to Kamal. The court stressed that the bail stage is not a substitute for a full trial and that its observations were limited to deciding the bail application.
The court made clear that its findings would not determine the merits of the prosecution case or affect the trial.
Under the bail order, Kamal must execute a personal bond of ₹50,000 with two sureties of the same amount. He has also been directed to surrender his passport, if he has one, and cannot leave India without prior permission from the trial court.
He has been directed not to leave his native Hapur district, except when travelling to Delhi to attend the trial or to report to the NIA as required. He must use only one mobile phone or landline number during the trial and provide his current residential address and contact details to the investigating officer and the trial court.
The court also imposed conditions intended to ensure his presence during the proceedings and prevent any interference with the investigation or trial.
The NIA has accused Kamal of being involved in the alleged Harkat Ul Harb E Islam conspiracy and of helping arrange funds for its activities. Kamal has denied the allegations and challenged the prosecution case.
The Delhi High Court’s order concerns bail only. The allegations against Kamal have not been finally determined, and the case will continue before the competent trial court.