NIA Court Rejects Bail to Ahmedabad Doctor Accused of Preparing Ricin
Summarized by AI; it may make mistakes. Check important info
Summarized by AI; it may make mistakes. Check important info
The special NIA court has rejected the regular bail application of accused doctor Syed Ahmed Mohiuddin, who is facing serious charges related to an alleged terror conspiracy, illegal possession of firearms and the alleged preparation of the deadly biological toxin ricin.
Special NIA Judge HR Raval dismissed the bail plea, observing that since the accused is a professional doctor, he could not have been unaware of the serious nature and potential dangers associated with a lethal biological toxin such as ricin.
The court also noted the allegations that the accused had allegedly set up a laboratory at his residence and was found travelling with unauthorised firearms and live ammunition. According to the court, these circumstances raised serious concerns about his alleged intentions.
NIA Opposes Bail
Opposing the bail plea, the special public prosecutor appearing for the NIA argued that the accused allegedly came into contact with a fugitive handler using the name Abu Khadija through Telegram in 2025.
The prosecution alleged that the accused established an unauthorised laboratory at his residence in Hyderabad and experimented with acetone and castor seeds to prepare ricin.
The NIA further alleged that the toxin was intended to be used as part of a plan for mass casualties in major Indian cities.
Three Pistols, 30 Live Cartridges Allegedly Recovered
According to the prosecution, the accused had travelled to the Chhatral area of Mehsana to collect ₹1 lakh in funding.
During his alleged visits to Ahmedabad and Mehsana in November 2025, investigators reportedly recovered three unlicensed pistols, 30 live cartridges, Indian and US currency, and four litres of castor oil from him.
The prosecution also alleged that the accused had sent a video showing himself taking an oath of allegiance at the direction of his alleged handlers and had administered similar oaths to other individuals to bring them into the network.
After hearing arguments from both sides, the special NIA court rejected the accused's bail application, citing the seriousness of the allegations and the provisions governing bail under Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
Some
