The Supreme Court on Friday restored the doctrine of “guilt by association” as it set aside its 2011 judgments, which had ruled that mere membership of a banned organisation cannot be a crime. A three-judge bench headed by justice MR Shah noted in its judgment that there was no challenge to the law when the principle of ascribing criminal liability on a person because of their association with a banned organisation was rejected by the court in its previous judgments, nor was the union government heard before the verdict.

Underlining that the impugned provision was completely in sync with the objective of the UAPA, the bench held that continued membership of an organisation banned under the 1967 law should be a crime against the sovereignty and integrity of the country.

The top court was considering the Centre’s plea to review the two judgments of 2011, in which a provision of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) (now repealed) was read down to hold that mere membership of a banned organisation cannot incriminate a person unless he or she resorted to or incited violence.

These decisions had come while hearing two separate cases of bail and conviction under TADA.

The Centre complained that not only it was imperative for the two-judge benches to seek its views at the time of hearing these cases but the reading down of the TADA provision had also impacted a similar provision under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), which prescribes punishment for being a member of an unlawful association.