E-Paper
SC to hear bail plea of Bhima Koregaon accused Surendra Gadling on Sep 17
The decision comes a week after another bench of the top court recused from hearing the matter amid concerns raised by Gadling’s lawyers over the long pendency of the matter since August 2023
The Supreme Court on Wednesday fixed September 17 as the date for hearing the bail plea of Bhima Koregaon violence accused , lawyer Surendra Gadling, a week after another bench of the top court recused itself from hearing the matter amid concerns raised by his lawyers over the long pendency of the matter since August 2023.
Gadling approached the top court seeking bail in a 2016 arson case after his plea for release was denied by the Bombay high court in January 2023. He was arrested in June 2018
A bench of justices JK Maheshwari and K Vinod Chandran said, “We will take up this matter after two weeks on September 17.” The matter was placed before this bench for the first time after a bench headed by justice MM Sundresh on August 26 recused itself from hearing the matter further without stating any reasons.
Senior advocate Anand Grover who appeared for Gadling pointed out that the National Investigation Agency (NIA) is yet to file its response even as notice was issued to them way back on October 10, 2023.
He pointed out that the matter relates to personal liberty of a citizen and Gadling has been in jail for nearly six-and-a-half years. “In March this year, they took time to file a response and the reply is still not filed. No charges have been framed and they are relying on the pending proceedings in the Bhima Koregaon violence case,” Grover said.
NIA was represented by additional solicitor general (ASG) SV Raju who requested for some more time to file a response. Considering the request, the bench extended time by two weeks.
Gadling, a human rights lawyer, is also undergoing incarceration in the Bhima Koregaon case. The arson case accuses him of being part of a conspiracy in committing a terrorist act by setting on fire 80 vehicles engaged in transporting iron ore from Surajgarh mines in Maharashtra’s Gadchiroli district in December 2016.
On July 18, the justice Sundresh-led bench directed the matter to be taken up in November 2025.After this order was mentioned before the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R Gavai , seeking urgent hearing in consideration of the fact that Gadling has been in jail since June 2018, the CJI advanced the November hearing date to August 26.
Justice Sundresh then recused himself on August 26.
Justice Sundresh has been hearing the bail plea of Gadling from July 9, 2024. Since then, on several occasions, the state has sought adjournments due to which there has not been any substantial hearing in the case. After notice was issued by the top court in October 2023, the matter has been listed on 16 occasions .
The charges against Gadling are under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and other provisions under the Indian Penal Code relating to attempt to murder (section 307), wrongful restraint (sections 341, 342), mischief by fire (section 435), criminal conspiracy (section 120B) among others.
The high court while refusing bail to Gadling, said, “On a consideration of the totality of the material on record alleged against the appellant (Gadling), we find that there is reasonable ground for believing the accusations of the NIA against the appellant having been part of a conspiracy and abetting the commission of terrorist acts, as also having direct membership of the banned organization Communist Party of India (Maoist) are prima facie to be true.”
It further held, “The threat posed to the public and the seriousness of the entire conspiracy alleged against the appellant would far outweigh the other considerations put forth by the appellant, namely that he is a prominent advocate with a long unblemished record at the bar, that he is the sole bread winner of his family or that he has not been involved in any earlier crime, (that) would require to be rejected.”
Prior to this, even the trial court in March 2022 rejected bail to Gadling holding that in view of section 43-D (5) of the UAPA, there are reasonable grounds to deny bail as the accusations against Gadling were prima facie found to be true.
