The Supreme Court today has raised concerns over the manner in which the National Investigation Agency (NIA) invoked provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in connection with violence and blockade incidents in West Bengal, observing that the decision appeared to have been taken “without even looking into the materials.”

The State challenged the Central Government’s order entrusting the investigation to the NIA under Section 6 of the NIA Act. During the hearing, the Bench questioned the basis on which Section 15 of the UAPA, dealing with “terrorist acts,” including threats to economic security, had been invoked.

“Without looking into documents you have said Section 15 is applicable. Is it a fair and just exercise of your powers? You have taken a decision without even looking into the materials,” the Court remarked.

The Bench noted that the High Court had merely directed the Centre to consider whether to exercise its powers under Section 6(5) of the NIA Act. It was thereafter that the NIA exercised suo motu powers and registered the case.

Senior counsel appearing for the State argued that the incident, though involving blockade of a national highway, was an “impromptu action born out of anguish” following the death of a migrant worker and could not automatically be branded as a threat to “economic security.”

The Court made a pointed observation in this regard that “Every emotional outburst cannot be packaged as a threat to economic security.”

At the same time, the Bench clarified that if, upon examination of materials, the investigating agency could demonstrate prima facie ingredients of Section 15, “the law will take its own course.” It directed that relevant records be handed over and permitted the NIA to submit a report before the High Court, potentially in a sealed cover, on whether the statutory requirements of Section 15 were satisfied.

The Bench was also informed that the State of West Bengal has separately challenged the Central Government’s order entrusting the investigation to the NIA. The Court observed that parallel proceedings would not be appropriate and indicated that the legality of that order would be considered in an appropriate forum.

The matter will now proceed in accordance with the directions issued, including examination by the High Court on whether Section 15 of the UAPA is prima facie attracted on the material available.