Delhi HC Holds UAPA Accused Cannot Claim Default Bail After 90 Days Under BNSS, Dismisses Jasir Bilal Wani’s Appeal

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has held that an accused booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) cannot claim default bail merely after 90 days, even though the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) has replaced the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

Background of the Case

The case arose from the November 10, 2025 explosion near Gate No. 4 of Lal Qila Metro Station in Delhi, allegedly caused by a vehicle-borne IED. The appellant, Jasir Bilal Wani @ Danish, was arrested on November 17, 2025 from the NIA camp office in Srinagar and booked under UAPA and Explosive Substances Act provisions.

While in custody, the NIA sought two extensions of the investigation period - first up to 135 days, then up to 180 days - both allowed by the trial court. The appellant's plea for default bail after 90 days was rejected, prompting him to approach the High Court.

His counsel, Senior Advocate Warisha Farasat, argued that since Section 43D of UAPA still refers only to the now-repealed Section 167 of Cr.P.C. and not to Section 187 of BNSS, the extended 180-day detention window doesn't apply anymore - meaning her client should get bail after 90 days.

Court's Observations

A Division Bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Vikas Mahajan disagreed. The Bench explained that Section 167 Cr.P.C. was merely "referred to" in UAPA, not physically incorporated into it - a distinction the court called crucial.

"By applying Section 8 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 along with the principle of 'Legislation by reference'... reference to Section 167 of the Cr.P.C. has to be construed as reference to Section 187 of the BNSS," the Bench observed.

The judges also noted that the legislative intent behind UAPA - allowing longer detention for serious offences like terrorism - cannot be defeated simply because Cr.P.C. was replaced by BNSS.

Separately, the court held that the appellant had lost his right to challenge the first extension order since he didn't contest it promptly, invoking the doctrine of acquiescence. It also upheld that Public Prosecutor reports need not be shared with the accused at the extension stage.

Decision

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellant was not entitled to default bail after 90 days.

The court clarified that he remains free to pursue other legal remedies available to him.

Case Details:

Case Title: Jasir Bilal Wani @ Danish v. National Investigation Agency

Case Number: CRL.A. 444/2026

Judge: Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Vikas Mahajan

Decision Date: August 18, 2026