Non-withdrawal of UAPA case shocks activist K P Nadir

KOZHIKODE/THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Mr K.P. Nadir, human rights activist hailing from the district, has expressed shock over the statement made by DGP Loknath Behera  that the  case under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act against him would stay. He was taken into custody on December 19 last year  in a case registered by the Aralam police, Kannur,  in March for distributing pro-Maoist leaflets at  Aralam. Though he was released after day-long questioning,  there was no official confirmation regarding the withdrawal of the case.

“I was getting involved in the cultural activities in the  town and was hopeful that the case would be withdrawn soon. I am ready to undergo any test, including polygraph, to prove my innocence,” Mr Nadir said.   Mr Nadir, who   was expecting a positive reply from the government, was shocked to hear of the statement made by Mr Behera. Mr Behera said in Thiruvananthapuram on Tuesday  that the case against Mr Nadir had not been withdrawn though     the state police had  decided to withdraw the sections of UAPA  invoked in 42 cases. Mr. Behera said that in many cases UAPA was registered considering the nature of complaints. But a decision whether to charge UAPA or not would be taken after further probe. A committee headed by Mr Behera reviewed 162 cases in which UAPA was invoked since 2012 and found that sections of UAPA were unwarranted in 42 cases.

  It was following the controversy over invoking the UAPA against Mr Nadir that the cases were reviewed. Even CPI state secretary Kanam Rajendran had openly flayed the invoking of UAPA. Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan had also cautioned the police  following the controversies. According to sources, the police officers concerned have been directed to file reports in courts to withdraw the UAPA provisions from the 42 cases. In other cases, including that of Nadir, a decision  would be taken after further probe. The 42 cases also include those related to Maoist activities like distribution of posters and call for boycotting elections. Though it was madatory that sections of UAPA should be invoked only with the consent of the district police chief, it was not being followed. The majority of the UAPA cases were registered in northern districts.