Section 28 of UAPA : Section 28: Appeal

Explanation using Example

Imagine a bookstore owner, Mr. Sharma, whose property was seized and subsequently forfeited by the government under the suspicion that the bookstore was being used to disseminate materials promoting terrorism, as per Section 26 of The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. Mr. Sharma, believing the forfeiture to be unjust, decides to challenge the order. He files an appeal to the High Court within one month of receiving the forfeiture order, as allowed by Section 28(1) of the Act, since the bookstore is located within that High Court's jurisdiction.

The High Court reviews the case and finds that the evidence against Mr. Sharma was not sufficient to justify the forfeiture. Consequently, the High Court annuls the forfeiture order. Following this, as per Section 28(2), Mr. Sharma's property should be returned to him. However, if the property cannot be returned for some reason (perhaps it was damaged beyond repair or lost), the Act ensures that Mr. Sharma will be compensated for the value of the property, including reasonable interest from the day it was seized, as if the property had been sold to the Central Government.