Why the NIA opposed Kerala gold smuggling accused Swapna’s bail plea

The NIA argued that Swapna shouldn’t be granted bail as that would derail the investigation into the gold smuggling case.
Swapna Suresh
Swapna Suresh
Written by:

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) has submitted before its Special Court in Kochi that Section 15 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act will stand in the Kerala gold smuggling case as the act of the accused Swapna Suresh is likely to threaten the security, monetary stability and economic security of the country. 

The NIA submitted its counter statement on Tuesday in response to the court’s direction to substantiate the terror link which the agency had alleged during the consideration of Swapna’s bail plea. 

The NIA had said that the proceeds from the sensational gold smuggling using diplomatic baggage via the Thiruvananthapuram International Airport were being used for terror purposes.

On July 29, the court had directed the NIA to substantiate its allegations even as key accused Swapna Suresh’s counsel moved her bail petition. Swapna is the second accused in the case that has rocked Kerala over the past several weeks after 30 kg of gold was seized from a diplomatic bag addressed to a Consulate Officer at the UAE Consulate in the state capital.

Swapna’s counsel had argued that Section 15 of the UAPA (Terrorist Act) won’t stand in her case.

“As per Section 15 of the Act, strictly speaking, knowledge that the act of the accused is likely to threaten the security, monetary stability and economic security of the country. Section 15 of the Act essentially prescribes that whoever does any act with intention to threaten or with the knowledge that such act is likely to threaten the security including the economic security of India by using whatever means to cause or likely to cause damage to the monetary stability of India by way of smuggling of any material, commits terrorist act. Thus it's clear that Section 15 of the UA(P) Act is clearly made to this crime,” the NIA statement said.

Objecting to the bail plea, the investigating agency said that the petitioner is not innocent of the allegations levelled against her. The NIA also argued that the plea is intended to derail the investigation in the case. 

“The whimsical and fanciful imagination of the defense can't be used to secure bail which is further intended to derail the investigation which would ultimately bring down the menace of gold smuggling. It’s revealed during investigation that while Swapna, was holding the post of Secretary to the Consul General at the Consulate of UAE, conspired and aided such gold smuggling using her privileges, as a staff of foreign mission. She continued to involve herself for the sake of facilitating such subversive activities,” said the NIA.

Countering the defense that the Act is not made out in this case, the NIA said that there is prima facie evidence to the effect that the accused intentionally committed this act which will fall directly under Section 15 of the UAPA.

“During investigation, it’s learnt that Swapna and the other accused had knowledge that such act is likely to threaten the security, including the economic security of India by using whatever means to cause or likely to cause damage to the monetary stability of India by way of smuggling of any material, committing terrorist acts. Thus it’s clear that Section 15 of the UAPA is clearly made to this crime. The proceeds of the smuggled gold could be used for financing terrorism in India, the Central government by exercising powers under various provisions of NIA Act directed NIA to register a crime and investigate followed by which NIA Kochi branch registered the crime alleging offences under sections 15, 16 and 17 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967. And the sections in the FIR are section 16, 17 and 18 of the Act,” the agency’s statement said.

The case surfaced when PS Sarith, the first accused, was arrested by the Customs Department on July 5 when he was allegedly facilitating the smuggling of 30 kilogram of gold in a diplomatic bag from Dubai to Thiruvananthapuram. Sarith is a former employee of the UAE Consulate in Thiruvananthapuram.

The NIA said, “The defense has made a futile attempt to drive a point that materials mentioned at Clause (iiia) of this Section means matters connected to counterfeit currency notes. The word used in the said Section is or of any other material and not any other materials used counterfeiting as mentioned in the bail application. On the other hand, a proper and objective appreciation of the Section would reveal any act that would cause damage to the monetary stability of India by way of smuggling of any other material like Gold would also attract an offense of terrorist act, since large scale smuggling of gold would lead to a parallel economy at the hands of the offenders and such parallel economy can pose threat to the monetary stability and economic security of the country.”

The NIA stated that Swapna Suresh had knowledge that the smuggled gold would be used for such subversive activities. 

“The petitioner also knew about the antecedents of all the accused while she transacted with them. It is also learnt during the investigation that the initial money required for obtaining gold was funded by various persons with dubious antecedents and that the money was sent abroad through Hawala Channel. Further, the source of gold smuggled from UAE is also under investigation,” the NIA said.

The NIA also stated that the offense has international bearing and has the tendency to affect the relationship with foreign states.

The agency concluded, “The investigation is not over. The petitioner has contacts with influential persons, she is capable to move and abscond even at the time of a pandemic. There is also change of the petitioner tampering with evidence and influencing the witnesses. The detention of the petitioner in judicial custody is required for the purpose of completing the investigation.”

Related Stories

No stories found.
The News Minute
www.thenewsminute.com