Mohali, May 13 -- A special National Investigation Agency (NIA) court in Mohali on Monday dismissed the bail application of Surmukh Singh, alias Sammu, alias Nika Baba, an accused in the Ludhiana district court complex blast case that killed one person and injured five others in 2021. The court of special judge Dinesh Kumar Wadhwa held that the material collected during the investigation established a prima facie case against the accused under provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), barring his release on bail under Section 43D(5) of the Act. According to the NIA, the explosion took place inside a bathroom near court 14 on the second floor of the Ludhiana district court complex on December 23, 2021. The blast killed Gagandeep Singh, alias Gagi, a dismissed head constable of Punjab Police who investigators identified as the person carrying the improvised explosive device (IED). Five others sustained injuries and the court property was damaged. The agency alleged that Surmukh Singh, a resident of Amritsar district, worked with Pakistan-based smugglers and terror handlers to facilitate the blast. The prosecution told the court that co-accused Harpreet Singh, alias Happy Malaysia, and Pakistan-based operatives, including Zulfikar alias Pehalwan and Lakhbir Singh Brar alias Rode, conspired to carry out a terror incident in Punjab. The NIA alleged that Surmukh Singh formed a module with co-accused persons, planned the collection and delivery of the IED and handed it over to Gagandeep Singh through other accused persons before the blast. Investigators also claimed that the accused pointed out locations where the explosive was dropped through a drone and later concealed. The defence argued that the case relied mainly on disclosure statements and that no incriminating recovery had been made from the accused. It also sought bail on grounds of prolonged custody and delay in trial. Rejecting the plea, the court observed that mobile phone data linked the accused to Pakistan-based smugglers and international virtual numbers. The court also held that the gravity of allegations, possibility of influencing witnesses and provisions of the UAPA weighed against granting bail....