Mumbai: A special court has allowed the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to frame an additional charge under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act against accused Sharjeel Shaikh for allegedly raising funds and providing financial assistance to a Syria-based terrorist organisation. Shaikh pleaded not guilty to the charge.The judge pointed to Sharjeel’s lawyer’s submission that the funds were transferred to the refugees. “…as regards the transfer of funds whether it was to the refugees or to some other terrorist organisation would be required to be tested upon the crucible of evidence. Therefore, in such circumstances framing of an additional charge…against the accused…can be well ventilated,” the judge said on September 10.The NIA informed the court that between 2015 and 2023, Sharjeel allegedly raised funds to further terrorist activities by making online payments to a Syria-based faction of the banned organisation SIMI. The prosecution relied on electronic evidence, including data extracted from email accounts, WhatsApp, Twitter, and Telegram. The agency claimed the chats demonstrated an intention to provide help to a Syrian combatant and that the funds were sent with the knowledge that they were likely to be used for committing terrorist acts.The six accused facing trial are Sharjeel, Tabish Siddiqui, Zulfikar Ali Barodawala, Zubair Shaikh alias Abu Nusaiba, Adnanali Sarkar, and Aakif Ateeque Nachan, who were arrested in July 2023 during multiple raids in Maharashtra by the NIA in the IS module case.Special public prosecutor Sunil Gonsalves argued that Section 216 of the Code of Criminal Procedure allowed alteration or addition of charges at any time before judgment, and that adding the charge at this stage would not prejudice the accused because evidence had not yet begun.The defence opposed the plea, arguing that the prosecution had not shown specific material to support the proposed charge. The defence also contended that the chargesheet did not show the accused’s affiliation with any terrorist organisation listed under the UAPA schedule, and therefore the charge could not be invoked.The court considered the electronic evidence cited by the prosecution. “…on perusal of the memorandum panchnama…, it is evident that there is an electronic evidence by way of chats propelling the accused…to have stated for providing help to a Syrian mujahid,” the judge said.The court said this issue would have to be tested during trial. “This aspect undoubtedly would be required to be tested upon the anvil of evidence, but it necessarily shows for such financial assistance proposed by the accused…and thus, the ingredients of the section proposed to be invoked can be well located.”It is the prosecution’s case that information was received that Tabish and unknown persons allegedly conspired to support terrorist activities linked to IS and related proscribed organisations with the aim of threatening India’s unity, security, sovereignty, and waging war against the Government of India. They allegedly recruited youths, trained them in making IEDs and using small arms, shared DIY materials, and created media content for the ‘Voice of Hind’ magazine under directions from foreign-based IS handlers.Considering the seriousness of the alleged offences and their impact on national security, the Centre determined that scheduled offences under the NIA Act had been committed and directed that the case be investigated by the NIA.
