Saibaba defence panel calls for his reinstatement as Delhi University professor

The defence committee has also issued a comprehensive set of demands urging the Supreme Court to reject the Maharashtra government’s appeal

A day before the Supreme Court is set to hear the Maharashtra government’s appeal against the acquittal of former Delhi University professor GN Saibaba, the defence committee for his release has asked the top court to reject the plea, according to documents seen by HT.

GN Saibaba at HKS Surjeet Bhawan in New Delhi on March 8. (Vipin Kumar/HT Photo)

Read here: Literary pursuit vs criminal intent: Decoding the Saibaba verdict

The committee has also issued a comprehensive set of demands urging the Supreme Court to reject the appeal. Additionally, the committee also called for Saibaba’s reinstatement to his position at Delhi University, with retrospective benefits and compensations. They also demand compensation for Saibaba, Hem Mishra, Prashant Rahi, Mahesh Tirki, Vijay Tirki, and the family of the late Pandu Narote.

Saibaba was arrested in 2014 and subsequently convicted under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) for alleged links with Maoists. Despite being discharged and ordered for immediate release by the Bombay high court in October 2022, the Supreme Court suspended the order, extending his detention. In April 2023, the case went to another bench of the Bombay high court and he was acquitted and released on 7 March.

The committee welcomed the Bombay high court judgment acquitting Saibaba and five others, saying, “The fact that the high court found them innocent of all charges is of great legal and political significance,” adding that the court’s decision “sends a strong message of hope to other, similarly beleaguered victims of state repression”.

Read here: ‘Stay in jail was like agni pariksha for me’: Former DU professor Saibaba

Bombay high court’s Nagpur bench on Tuesday emphasised that merely accessing content related to communist or Maoist ideologies was not inherently illegal unless there was concrete evidence linking the accused to specific acts of violence or terrorism.