In a recent Supreme Court hearing, concerns were raised that children of an accused in a drug case were bullied at school after the case was wrongly linked to terrorism. The accused's lawyer informed the bench that the children were called "terrorists’ children" and had to be withdrawn from school for their safety.

The issue came up during the bail hearing in the case Harpreet Singh Talwar @ Kabir Talwar vs. State of Gujarat, where the National Investigation Agency (NIA) was mentioned in relation to alleged terror funding. However, the case itself was not investigated by the NIA.

Read Also:- Supreme Court: Magistrate’s Cognizance Order Cannot Be Faulted for Lack of Detailed Reasons

Senior Advocate Aryama Sundaram cited a media report, stating that Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati linked drug proceeds from a 3,000 kg heroin seizure worth ₹21,000 crore to terrorist activities, allegedly connected to the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and the Pahalgam attack. The ASG had commented, “Look what they did to India at Pahalgam by shooting innocent tourists.”

Sundaram argued that this statement caused public perception to shift against the accused's family, resulting in harassment and threat calls. He appealed to the Court to clarify that the case had no connection with the Pahalgam attack.

“It’s all because of what was said in court, that this is an NIA case. NIA has not even investigated. Everybody should know how comments can affect innocents,” Sundaram stated.

Read Also:- Delhi High Court: No Discretion to Waive Pre-Deposit Under Section 107(6) of CGST Act While Filing Appeal

Justice Surya Kant responded calmly, assuring that media reports or outside influences would not affect the court's decision.

“I never allow myself to be influenced by any extraneous reasons, whether news item or anything... Just forget it. These are all perceptions, sometimes correct, sometimes wrong.”

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta added that the probe suggested a financial link between the drug trade and LeT. But Sundaram challenged this, saying there was “no evidence whatsoever” to support such a claim.

Read Also:- Supreme Court: Prospective Accused Cannot Oppose CBI Investigation Order

Justice Kant further clarified that the ASG’s comments may have been emotional, and not meant as a legal position.

“This is not the issue that arises for consideration... Sometimes people are swayed by emotions while arguing cases. It happens on both sides,” the judge remarked.

Later, ASG Bhati appeared and assured the Court that if children were suffering, local police would ensure their safety.

“Children should not suffer. If that is the issue, police will take care of it,” she submitted.

Before closing the matter, Justice Kant made an important observation:

“No family member of any person, whosoever committed or did not commit anything, no family member should suffer due to it. Take care of that part. We really don’t want to say anything. You know very well what is to be done.”

Case Title: HARPREET SINGH TALWAR @ KABIR TALWAR Versus THE STATE OF GUJARAT, SLP(Crl) No. 8878/2024