Mohali, July 15 -- A special NIA court has dismissed the bail plea of an alleged arms supplier in a terror conspiracy case linked to foreign-based operatives Lakhbir Singh alias Landa and Harwinder Singh alias Rinda, holding that the allegations disclosed a prima facie case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). Special judge Dinesh Kumar Wadhwa rejected the plea of Jatinder Singh alias Joti, 34, of Gurdaspur, observing that Section 43D(5) of the UAPA barred his release as the material on record indicated his involvement in the alleged conspiracy. The court also noted the possibility of the accused influencing witnesses, tampering with evidence or absconding if granted bail. According to the National Investigation Agency (NIA), the case was registered in July 2023 against Canada-based Landa and Pakistan-based Rinda for allegedly raising funds for the banned outfit Babbar Khalsa International (BKI) through narcotics smuggling, extortion and illegal arms trafficking to carry out terrorist activities in Punjab. The agency alleged that Jatinder was associated with absconding accused Pavittar Preet Singh alias Pavittar Batala and Baljot Singh. Between January and May 2024, he allegedly received 15 illegal pistols from co-accused Baljit Singh alias Rana Bhai on the directions of foreign-based handlers and supplied them to gang members in Gurdaspur district. The NIA further claimed that payments were made in cash and through the bank accounts of his relatives. The agency also told the court that the data extracted from the accused's mobile phones revealed photographs and videos of firearms, encrypted chats, and the use of foreign virtual numbers allegedly used to coordinate arms deliveries. Seeking bail, the defence argued that Jatinder was not named in the FIR, had no other criminal case against him, the investigation had been completed, charges had already been framed, and the trial was likely to take time. The court, however, held that the charges framed against the accused and the material collected during the investigation established a prima facie case under the UAPA. It was observed that, as laid down by the Supreme Court, delay in trial alone cannot justify bail in cases involving serious offences under the UAPA. The court clarified that its observations were limited to deciding the bail application and would not affect the merits of the trial....