SC refers SIMI ban issue to larger bench

A matter related to ban on the Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) was today referred by the Supreme Court to a larger bench. The ban on SIMI was in August lifted by a special tribunal whose order was subsequently stayed by the apex court. The reference was made by a two-judge bench of Justices S B Sinha and Cyriac Joseph in view of the fact that a larger bench of three judges of the apex court was already hearing the ban imposed on the SIMI by the Government in 2001.

The tribunal headed by Delhi High Court judge Justice Geeta Mittal on August 5 had lifted the ban on SIMI saying no new evidence was placed against the organisation to justify the ban. However, a day later, an apex court bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan stayed the tribunal's order an dissued notice to SIMI while asking the Centre to place before it all documents pertaining to the justification of the ban. The apex court's stay was opposed by Dr Shahid Badr, who was the President of the outfit till September 27, 2001 when the Centre had come out with its first notification to declare it as an proscribed organisation.

The Centre had been extending the ban every two years since 2001 on the ground that SIMI was continuing with its anti-national activities and Badr had earlier challenged the original ban before the apex court. Justifying the ban, the Centre had told the Supreme Court that SIMI was involved in subversive and anti-national activities including the recent blasts in Ahmedabad. The Govt said the tribunal failed to appreciate the 'background note', 'cabinet note' and 'intelligence reports' before arriving at its decision to lift the ban on the organisation.

The argument was opposed by Badr's counsel Jaiswal whosaid the tribunal had gone into all these three aspects andwas of the view that the averments in them were not supportedby evidence and deposition of the government witnesses. She said the background note of the Centre's February 7, 2008 notification extending the ban on SIMI till 2010, whichwas placed before the Tribunal in sealed cover, spoke aboutnine cases involving its members who were already acquitted after facing trial in the courts. However, the apex court had observed "the backgroundnote can be a general statement while issuing the notification.

The background note is only a synopsis which could be substantiated in future. "The Centre had complained to the apex court that it had given details about SIMI's alleged involvement in the July 2006 Mumbai train serial blasts to justify the ban, but the same was ignored by the tribunal. According to the Centre, the tribunal set up under the Unlawful Activities (prevention) Act, in its 263-page orderhas not pressed anything on the merits of the case even whenthe government has provided Intelligence Bureau report spointing towards members of SIMI indulging in terrorist activities.