After 10-month wait, 7 TISS students get anticipatory bail, 2 denied

MUMBAI: Nearly ten months after nine students of Mumbai’s Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) sought anticipatory bail in a case registered over a memorial for former Delhi University professor GN Saibaba, a Sessions Court has granted relief to seven students, while refusing relief to two others

MUMBAI: Nearly ten months after nine students of Mumbai’s Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) sought anticipatory bail in a case registered over a memorial for former Delhi University professor GN Saibaba, a Sessions Court has granted relief to seven students, while refusing relief to two others. The court held the students’ “act of paying homage” to Saibaba, who was acquitted before his death, “cannot be termed as illegal”.

The court on Friday granted anticipatory bail to Nikita Monica D’Souza, Uttkarsh Khuntia, Yash Kaundilya, Avantika, Ishpreet Kaur, Hardika Bhagat and Satyam Yadav, observing that no serious incriminating material had surfaced against them beyond their alleged participation in the programme and that their custodial interrogation was unnecessary.

It, however, denied the same relief to Abhirup Paul and Kamakhya Prasad Das, relying on allegations of downloaded material and deleted data recovered from their electronic devices, and alleged non-cooperation with the investigation, thus allowing their custodial interrogation.

In Das’s case, the court also referred to allegations that she, along with Kaundilya, had raised slogans seeking the release of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, who are accused in the 2020 Delhi riots case, during the event.

“This court could not follow the same in view of heavy pendency,” the judge observed, attributing the delay to the heavy docket and the poor judge-population ratio before remarking that if anticipatory bail applications themselves take so long, criminal trials in serious cases are bound to take much longer.

The case stems from an FIR lodged by the TISS administration after a group of students allegedly organised a memorial gathering for Saibaba, a scholar and human rights activist, on the institute’s Mumbai campus on October 12, 2025, his first death anniversary, without prior permission.

According to the prosecution, the participants displayed photographs of Saibaba, lit candles, read his poems and allegedly raised slogans demanding the release of Khalid and Imam. The investigation, initially conducted by Trombay police, was subsequently transferred to the Crime Investigation Department.

On why the two students were denied anticipatory bail, the court said that material allegedly recovered during the investigation suggested that Paul and Das were “inspired by the thinking or ideology of Maoist” and that the alleged gathering was part of an attempt to influence other students. It said the material allegedly found on their electronic devices was “instigating and aiding illegal activities including division of the country”.

Saibaba had been charged under the stringent Unlawful Activities Prevention Act but was acquitted after nearly ten years in 2024. The judge remarked that while his acquittal meant paying homage to him was not illegal, “it was not the platform” for raising slogans seeking the release of Khalid and Imam, adding that being students, they were expected to “respect the law of land”. These observations were made while granting anticipatory bail to the seven students.

Advocate Vijay Hiremath, representing the students, said the rejection of anticipatory bail for Paul and Das would be challenged before the Bombay High Court. “The court deciding the applications after such a long time is something for the court to answer. We had argued that, considering the delay alone, anticipatory bail ought to have been granted to all the applicants,” he said.