<p>The <strong>Supreme Court of India</strong> on 20 May 2026 overturned the conviction of a Sri Lankan refugee under the <span class="key-term" data-definition="Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act – a law aimed at preventing activities that threaten the sovereignty and integrity of India (GS2: Polity)">UAPA</span>. The apex court found that the accused had been wrongly identified as the absconding prime accused, leading to a miscarriage of justice.</p>
<h3>Key Developments</h3>
<ul>
<li>Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and Vijay Bishnoi set aside the Madras High Court’s decision upholding the conviction.</li>
<li>The conviction was based solely on the belated testimonies of prosecution witnesses PW‑8 and PW‑9, who admitted they never mentioned the name “Ranjan” before the appellant’s arrest.</li>
<li>The investigating agency failed to conduct a <span class="key-term" data-definition="Test Identification Parade – a police procedure where witnesses identify the accused from a line‑up; its absence weakens identification evidence (GS2: Polity)">Test Identification Parade (TIP)</span> after the arrest.</li>
<li>The FIR filed by Q Branch Police, Ramanathapuram, listed offences under the Indian Penal Code, UAPA, Poisons Act, Foreigners Act and Passport Act, alleging a conspiracy to revive the banned LTTE.</li>
<li>The Supreme Court ordered the immediate release of the appellant from the Special Camp in Trichy and allowed his request for relocation to Switzerland.</li>
</ul>
<h3>Important Facts</h3>
<p>The case originated from a <span class="key-term" data-definition="First Information Report – the initial police document that records the details of a cognizable offence (GS2: Polity)">FIR</span> registered in 2015. Prosecutors alleged that a group of accused assembled in Trichy to send <span class="key-term" data-definition="Cyanide capsules – lethal chemical agents often used in assassinations; their mention highlights security concerns (GS3: Security)">cyanide capsules</span> and a chemical called GPS‑4 to Sri Lanka to eliminate rival Tamil leaders. The appellant, identified as “Accused No. 5 – Sri”, was accused of supplying 75 capsules and 60 g of GPS‑4, but he was arrested only in December 2021.</p>
<p>The appellant maintained that his real name was <strong>Ranjan</strong>, not “Sri”, and that he had entered India legally in 2009 on a tourist visa with his family, residing openly in Trichy. No contemporaneous description linking him to the absconding accused “Sri” was found in the FIR or earlier witness statements.</p>
<p>Both PW‑8 and PW‑9, during cross‑examination, confessed that they introduced the name “Ranjan” only after the appellant’s arrest, making their later testimony unreliable. The Court described this as an “abuse of process of law” and emphasized the lack of any documentary or independent corroboration.</p>
<h3>UPSC Relevance</h3>
<ul>
<li>Understanding the functioning of the <span class="key-term" data-definition=
Loading page, please wait…