New Delhi [India], October 12 (ANI): The Delhi High Court is listed to pronounce its judgment on Monday (tomorrow) in the matter concerning the maintainability of a petition filed by the banned organisation Popular Front of India (PFI), which has challenged the UAPA Tribunal's decision upholding a five-year ban imposed by the Central Government.

Earlier, the court had reserved its order after hearing detailed arguments from both sides. The matter was heard by a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela.

The core question before the Bench was whether the High Court has jurisdiction to hear the appeal under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, or whether such a challenge should be made directly to the Supreme Court under Article 136.

During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) S.V. Raju, appearing for the Union Government, strongly opposed the maintainability of the petition. He argued that since the UAPA Tribunal was presided over by a sitting High Court judge, its decision cannot be reviewed by another bench of the same court.

'A sitting judge of the High Court has upheld the ban on the organisation. How, then, can a writ lie?' The ASG questioned, maintaining that the Tribunal's order could only be challenged before the Supreme Court.

ASG Raju further contended that the Tribunal does not qualify as a 'subordinate court', thereby limiting the scope of judicial review under Articles 226 and 227.

On the other hand, PFI's counsel, appearing in person, submitted a detailed note of arguments and relied on previous judicial precedents to assert that the writ petition was indeed maintainable. Citing an earlier Division Bench ruling, the counsel argued that the High Court retains its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 and that access to justice must not be curtailed.

'This Court has held that a writ under 226 is maintainable,' the counsel submitted, emphasising that the Supreme Court, while directing the petitioner to approach the High Court, had not commented on the maintainability, leaving the issue open for independent interpretation.

The Bench noted that the Supreme Court had not issued any definitive ruling on the matter and indicated that it would examine the cited precedents independently. After hearing both sides, the court had reserved its order on the question of maintainability, which is now listed for pronouncement.

The case stems from the Central Government's decision in September 2022 to impose a five-year ban on PFI and its affiliates under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), citing alleged involvement in terrorist activities and incitement of communal hatred.

The UAPA Tribunal, headed by a sitting High Court judge, upheld the ban, accepting the Ministry of Home Affairs' submission that PFI and its associated organisations, including Campus Front of India, Rehab India Foundation, and National Women's Front, were engaged in unlawful activities.

The government had produced extensive evidence before the Tribunal, including video footage and testimony from over 100 witnesses, linking PFI to proscribed outfits such as ISIS, SIMI, and Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB). It also alleged that PFI was involved in financing terrorism, targeted killings, and attempts to destabilise public order. (ANI)