‘UAPA offences can’t spring from air’: Karnataka High Court in US funding case

4 min readBengaluruUpdated: Jun 17, 2026 06:53 PM IST

Justice M Nagaprasanna has orally directed the police not to take any precipitative action till the order is pronounced.

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday reserved its order on petitions filed by six people to quash an FIR registered in Bengaluru for allegedly channelling over Rs 92.55 crore in illegal foreign funds to India, with a portion said to have reached Maoist-affected areas in Chhattisgarh and Assam.

Justice M Nagaprasanna has orally directed the police not to take any precipitative action against the petitioners—Micah Mark, Jonathan S Rajan, Ajit Varghese Mathai, Varghese Chacko, Bablu Kurmi, and Supreme Joy—till the court pronounces its order.

The accused have been charged under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita sections 318 (4), 335(a)(2), 336(3), 238, 61(2), and 190, as well as Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act sections 13, 17, and 18.

According to the FIR registered based on the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) complaint filed at the Kothanur police station on Thursday, The Timothy Initiative (TTI), headquartered in Raleigh, North Carolina, routed foreign funds to India using US bank debit cards, withdrawing cash through ATMs across Karnataka, Chhattisgarh, and Assam—in violation of the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) and the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA). Between November 2025 and April 2026, Rs 92.55 crore ($9.9 million) was allegedly transacted in violation of laws. Over the past few years, more than 1,000 such foreign debit cards are alleged to have been distributed across India.

During the hearing, the court remarked, “UAPA offence if you (police) allege against someone, he is marred for the future. You have to be careful in registering the offence. UAPA offences cannot spring from the air; there should be some foundation.”

ED sharing information with other agencies

Senior advocate Shyam Sunder, appearing for Mark, argued that the offence was registered based on a suspicion for which the ED officer who filed the complaint had no credible evidence. He contended that ED was investigating an offence under the FEMA and could not have shared information with the police under section 66 (2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

Sunder said, “Everything is on the basis of suspicion, and there is no proof. The ED officer is hallucinating about the suspicion, and the Bengaluru police have registered a case, thinking PMLA is passing the information.”

Story continues below this ad

Senior advocate S Basvaraj, appearing for the other accused, argued that they had not received any international debit cards from Mark and were not involved in any of the alleged activities.

Public Prosecutor B N Jagadeesha argued that the funds withdrawn by the accused using the debit cards were allegedly used to fund left-wing extremist organisations banned under the UAPA.

Advocate Madhu N Rao, appearing for ED, submitted that Mark was arrested based on a lookout circular issued against him and that the agency seized 24 international debit cards. Further, he argued that prima facie evidence collected during the FEMA offence led to the information being shared with the Bengaluru police, who registered the case. He argued that ED can share information.

Section 66(2) of the PMLA Act allows ED or such other authority to share information with other agencies if it believes that other laws have been violated.

Story continues below this ad

The court also indicated that ED has the power to share information it received during investigations with other agencies. But it further said, “Whether information received while probing a case under FEMA Act can be shared with other agencies is a question we will have to answer.”

‘There has to be a limit to being paranoid’

Sunder concluded his submission by saying that being a Christian preacher did not mean Mark was supporting left-wing extremism. “There has to be a limit to being paranoid,” the counsel added.

The court then said, “Your charity has no clarity. That is what their allegation is.”

The ED complaint, filed by Assistant Director Sunil Kumar Sinhmar, alleged that funds were received and utilised without a valid FCRA registration or government permission. Cards were allegedly issued in a fictitious name, Santosh Kumar. Additionally, TTI’s global portal became inaccessible to Indian users following ED’s raids, and digital banking records were allegedly deleted under Mark’s direction.

Story continues below this ad

ED also said that its investigation revealed that in Dhamtari, a Maoist-affected area, foreign debit cards were used at the Vijaya Paleja branch ATM of a cooperative bank, with Chacko allegedly overseeing withdrawals. It claimed to have found evidence of Rs 6.34 crore being funnelled into these regions to sustain cash-based networks linked to Maoist units and cadres.