The Supreme Court has granted bail to UAE-based businessman Naval Kishore Kapoor, an accused in the Kashmir terror funding case involving Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba chief Hafiz Muhammad Saeed and Kashmiri businessman Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali, noting that he is over 72 years old and has spent more than eight years in custody, while the trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future.
A bench of justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta took note of Kapoor’s prolonged incarceration. The bench observed that the trial appeared to be far from getting over in the near future owing to the large number of witnesses. The Supreme Court’s order came despite the stringent bail provisions under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
He was arrested on July 26, 2018.
The court, in its order on Tuesday, added that it would be open to the prosecution and the trial court to seek recall of the bail order in case Kapoor attempts to delay the trial. The case arises out of an investigation ordered by the Ministry of Home Affairs in May 2017, after the government received information that Saeed and other separatist leaders were allegedly involved in raising, collecting and distributing funds for terrorist activities in Kashmir. The Delhi High Court had in May 2025 rejected Kapoor’s plea for bail, holding that there was prima facie material indicating that he had aided Watali in bringing foreign remittances into India for furthering secessionist and terrorist activities in Kashmir. The NIA, however, had opposed bail by relying on the stringent restrictions contained in Section 43D(5) of the UAPA, under which an accused cannot ordinarily be released if the court finds reasonable grounds for believing that the allegations are prima facie true.
Senior advocate Shadan Farasat appeared for Kapoor, while senior counsel Sidharth Luthra represented the National Investigation Agency (NIA). The NIA alleged that the funds were brought into India through hawala networks and other illegal channels to finance violent protests, stone-pelting, arson and destruction of public property. The high court had also expressed apprehension that Kapoor could flee from the clutches of law and noted that protected witnesses were yet to be examined.
Kapoor had argued before the high court that he had already spent more than six years in custody and that the trial was progressing slowly.
