Umarmia v. State of Gujrat

The Supreme Court upheld the Designated Court's dismissal of the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. and Section 20(8) of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, affirming that a prima facie case of serious offences under TADA was established against the Appellant. The Court noted the Appellant's long abscondence and the potential for evidence tampering as significant factors in denying bail. The Court also addressed the argument regarding the lack of prior approval from the District Superintendent of Police under Section 20A(1) of the TADA Act, ultimately finding it insufficient to warrant bail.