Two of the 12 accused in the Vijayawada terror links case have been released on default bail, four days after a special court hearing for National Investigation Agency (NIA) cases in Visakhapatnam granted them bail, people familiar with the development said on Tuesday.
Those arrested in the case included Mohammed Rahantulla Sharif (A1), Mohammed Danish (A2) and Mirza Sohail Beg (A3), all from Vijayawada; Shadman Dilkash (A4) from Bihar; Sayeeda Begum (A5) from Hyderabad; Shaikh Fayaz Rehman (A6); Lucky Ahmed (A7) from Delhi; Azmanulla Khan (A8); Zeeshan (A9) from Rajasthan; Meer Asif Ali Bankura (A10) from West Bengal; Abdul Salam (A11) from Ballari in Karnataka; and Shah Rukh Khan (A12) from Pune. On March 24, the Andhra Pradesh police’s counter-intelligence cell arrested 12 people belonging to Al Malik Islamic Youth, who were suspected of having links to banned terrorist outfits such as al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent (AQIS) and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), following a multi-state operation. Saleem said the NIA court directed both accused to furnish personal bonds of ₹ 50,000 each, along with two sureties.
The accused told investigators that although they had harboured extremist tendencies for some time, their radicalisation intensified only after they came into contact with a foreign handler identified as Al Hakeem Shukur on social media, according to the police.
As part of the bail conditions, Sayeeda Begum must report to the NIA office in Hyderabad once a month, while Shadman Dilkash was directed to appear before the NIA office in Patna, Bihar.
The investigation revealed that Pakistan-based handlers had planned a dedicated women’s wing, Khawateen, allegedly headed by Sayeeda Begum, to train recruits in using sniper rifles, guns, black powder bombs and improvised explosive devices (IEDs) to target non-Muslims and spread terror in India. The NIA court granted default bail to the two accused on October 6 after the statutory investigation period of 180 days expired without the investigating agency filing charge sheets, according to Saleem. The defence argued that the NIA filed charge sheets against other accused in the case but had not named the two for want of evidence, claiming that no material evidence existed to establish the alleged offences against them. It argued that their continued detention was not legally sustainable once the prescribed investigation period elapsed. The case was initially registered by the II Town Police Station in Vijayawada under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Information Technology Act. The investigation was subsequently transferred to the National Investigation Agency.
