India News | Delhi HC Rejects Plea by Ukrainian Nationals in NIA Terror Case Against Probe Extension
Get latest articles and stories on India at LatestLY. Justice Madhu Jain dismissed the petition filed by Hurba Petro and other Ukrainian nationals against the extension of the investigation period.
New Delhi [India], August 31 (ANI): The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed a petition filed by Ukrainian nationals accused in a terror case registered by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), challenging the trial court's order extending the investigation period from 90 days to 180 days.
Justice Madhu Jain dismissed the petition filed by Hurba Petro and other Ukrainian nationals against the extension of the investigation period. The court said that a detailed order would be uploaded by the evening or by Tuesday.
Also Read | Rewa Lift Collapse Video: Patient Dies After Getting Trapped in Hospital Elevator in Madhya Pradesh.
Six Ukrainian nationals and one US national were arrested by the NIA in April 2026 in connection with the case.
On August 11, the Delhi High Court had reserved its order on the plea filed by the Ukrainian nationals challenging the extension of the investigation period from 90 days to 180 days.
Opposing the plea, the NIA submitted that the trial court had passed the order extending the investigation period after applying its judicial mind and considering the report of the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP).
Special Public Prosecutor Rahul Tyagi, along with advocate Jatin Khatri, appeared for the NIA and submitted that the court could extend the period of investigation after considering the SPP's report and the application seeking the extension.
The NIA also submitted that the application was intentionally kept generic to maintain confidentiality regarding the progress of the investigation.
"We can't disclose how far we have come and how far we will have to go," the NIA submitted.
The agency further argued that the accused had not moved any bail application and had instead sought release on the ground that the investigation had not been completed.
Senior advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan, along with advocate Nitin Saluja, appeared for the petitioners and opposed the NIA's submissions.
The petitioners' counsel argued that their right to default bail had been defeated due to the erroneous extension of the investigation period, submitting that the right to bail is derived from Article 21 of the Constitution.
The counsel further argued that the trial court had extended the investigation period by 90 days at a stretch.
Earlier, on August 4, a division bench of the Delhi High Court had disposed of an appeal filed by six Ukrainian nationals challenging their detention and the extension of the investigation period, holding that an order extending the investigation period under the NIA Act was not appealable.
The Ukrainian nationals are in judicial custody following their arrest by the NIA in April 2026. The investigation period was extended from 90 days to 180 days.
During the earlier proceedings, senior advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan, appearing for the appellants, had relied on a December 12, 2024 judgment of a Delhi High Court division bench in the Anamul Ansari case.
In that case, the High Court had considered various provisions and precedents and held that an appeal against an order relating to the extension of the investigation period would be maintainable. (ANI)
(The above story is verified and authored by ANI staff, ANI is South Asia's leading multimedia news agency with over 100 bureaus in India, South Asia and across the globe. ANI brings the latest news on Politics and Current Affairs in India & around the World, Sports, Health, Fitness, Entertainment, & News. The views appearing in the above post do not reflect the opinions of LatestLY)