Elgar Parishad case: HC concludes hearing of Hany Babu’s bail plea

The Bombay high court on Monday concluded the hearing of a default bail application filed by Hany Babu, an accused in the Elgar Parishad case, and reserved its order

The Bombay high court on Monday concluded the hearing of a default bail application filed by Hany Babu, an accused in the Elgar Parishad case, and reserved its order.

Delhi University associate professor Hany Babu HT Archives

Babu’s counsel claimed that the allegations against him of carrying out anti-national activities were baseless and did not come under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) as no lives were lost. The only crime that Babu was booked for was covered under the Indian Penal Code, he added.

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) countered the argument saying lives need not to be lost to invoke the UAPA and the mere act of conspiring to commit an assassination like that of former prime minister Rajiv Gandhi constitutes a crime under the law. The Center sought the dismissal of Babu’s appeal.

A division bench of justice Nitin Jamdar and justice N R Borkar was hearing the appeal of Babu challenging the lower court’s rejection of his default bail plea.

Advocate Yug Choudhary, appearing for the Delhi University associate professor, said that the letters allegedly seized from the computers of Babu and his co-accused Rona Wilson could not be used to prove his complicity in any of the crimes attributed to him by the NIA.

Choudhary was responding to the submissions by additional solicitor general Anil Singh.

Singh had on August 26 read out the letters in which other accused like Varavara Rao and Arun Ferreira had referred to the terror activities that were to be undertaken across different states in India.

The second response given to the NIA’s submissions by Choudhary dealt with the fact that assuming that the accused had the formula to make bombs, that crime fell within the ambit of the IPC. He further said that as the bombs mentioned by the NIA in its chargesheet were not detonated and no lives were lost, he could not be denied the benefit of default bail as section 43 (D) of the UAPA was not applicable.

Choudhary added that Babu had been behind bars for two years and the trial was not expected to start soon; so, he should be granted bail.

The prosecution said that there was ample evidence to show that Babu was actively involved in mobilising a cadre for anti-national activities and hence, granting him bail would not be desirable.

Babu had approached the HC challenging the lower court rejection of his bail application which he claimed was filed along with that of another accused Sudha Bharadwaj. She was granted bail by the HC. The lower court had said that Babu filed the plea after the expiry of the stipulated period following his arrest.