SC allows Hany Babu to seek Bail in Bhima Koregaon case
A bench comprising Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice PB Varale passed the order while dismissing a miscellaneous application filed by Babu seeking clarification that the withdrawal of his earlier Special Leave Petition (SLP) did not prevent the High Court from hearing his bail plea.
The court also said that Babu could seek revival of the earlier SLP filed in the Supreme Court.
In September 2022, the Bombay High Court denied bail to Babu, who was arrested in July 2020 by the NIA over alleged Maoist links in the Bhima Koregaon case.
Subsequently, in May 2024, he withdrew his SLP in the Supreme Court, stating his intent to approach the High Court for bail, citing a change in circumstances.
On May 2 this year, the High Court observed that the Supreme Court's order allowing withdrawal did not expressly reserve liberty for him to approach it again, and asked Babu to seek clarification from the top court.
During today's hearing, Advocate Payoshi Roy, appearing for Babu, submitted that he has spent five years as an undertrial and withdrew his SLP to approach the High Court as several co-accused had been granted bail on grounds of prolonged incarceration.
She stated that in comparison to these accused, Babu was 'better placed.'
The court was informed that the Bombay High Court had granted bail to Rona Wilson, Sudhir Dhawale, and Sudha Bharadwaj, while the Supreme Court granted bail to P Varavara Rao on medical grounds, and to Shoma Sen, Vernon Gonsalves, and Arun Ferreira on merits.
Opposing the plea, the NIA counsel submitted that the miscellaneous application was not maintainable as a fresh bail petition lay before the NIA court, and the High Court would act as an appellate court under UAPA provisions.
He argued, 'This is an interim bail couched as an MA.'
Justice Mithal suggested that the petitioner approach the trial court, observing, 'Your primary ground is, some other accused has been granted bail, that can also be considered by the trial court.'
Advocate Roy responded that constitutional courts could grant bail despite the restrictions of Section 43D(5) of UAPA, relying on judgments like K.A. Najeeb, which held that courts can grant bail on grounds of delayed trial and violation of Article 21.
Justice Mithal acknowledged that constitutional courts can grant bail but questioned, 'Can we direct the High Court to consider a matter which does not lie before it?'
He also noted that Babu's current plea was based on parity with co-accused and not specifically on grounds of delayed trial.
Concluding the hearing, the bench ordered, 'The miscellaneous application is dismissed, leaving it open to seek remedies either before the trial court or the High Court or seek revival of the SLP.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
13 minutes ago
- Indian Express
2023 Dhangri killings: NIA court frames charges against 2 for sheltering terrorists, acting as their guide
The NIA court has framed charges against two persons under various Sections of the IPC and UAPA for not only harboring and providing food to terrorists involved in the killing of seven people in the twin terror attacks at Dhangri near Rajouri town on January 1 and 2, 2023, but also acting as their guide and helping them return to their hideout after the killings. Identified as Nisar Ahmed alias Haji Nisar and Mushtaq Hussain alias Chacha, the accused are lodged in the high security Kot Bhalwal jail in Jammu. The court also charged them under provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act for utilising the services of a minor for illegal activities. The NIA told the court that on January 1, 2023, some terrorists entered some houses at Dhangri and opened fire, killing four people and injuring seven others. One more succumbed to injuries. The next morning, two children were killed and some others injured in an IED explosion at the house of one of the victims. The IED was planted by the terrorists before they left after the firing. Initially, an FIR was registered at Rajouri police station, but later the NIA reregistered the case and took up probe following orders from the Centre. During probe, involvement of Pakistan-based terrorist organisation, Lashar-e-Taiba, surfaced, the NIA said. The accused, who appeared before the court through virtual mode, pleaded not guilty. Special Judge NIA Sandeep Gandotra observed that the allegations are very serious and there is sufficient material to show prima facie that they in furtherance of criminal conspiracy not only harboured the terrorists and provided them food and shelter, but they also acted as their guide and helped them return to their hideout after the massacre. The accused were in contact with the terrorists for approximately three months and they did not tell anybody about them despite getting many opportunities, the judge observed, quoting the NIA investigation. The judge on Thursday charged Nisar Ahmed for commission of offences under Sections 120-B and 201 of the IPC, Sections 18, 19, 20, 38 and 39 of the UAPA, besides Section 83 of the Juvenile Justice Act. Mushtaq was charged under Sections 120-B of IPC, Sections 18, 19 and 39 of UAPA and Section 83 of the Juvenile Justice Act.
Time of India
24 minutes ago
- Time of India
Varma moves SC for quashing of inquiry report, questions in-house procedure validity
NEW DELHI: Ahead of a possible removal motion in Parliament's monsoon session, Justice Yashwant Varma moved Supreme Court for quashing of an in-house inquiry report holding him guilty for the huge illicit cash at his official residence in Delhi and challenged the constitutionality of then CJI Sanjiv Khanna's recommendation to the Centre to strip him of HC judgeship. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Justice Varma, whose defence team is led by senior advocates including Kapil Sibal, filed the petition faulting the process adopted by the three-member panel to inquire into the cash allegedly found at his bungalow, terming the panel's conclusions about his guilt as mere surmises without evidence. Varma questions validity of in-house procedure that allows CJI to recommend removal of judge Interestingly, the day saw a PIL being filed in the SC by advocate Mathews Nedumpara seeking registration of an FIR for the unaccounted cash that was discovered within the premises of the judge's official residence by first responders who reached after a fire on the night of March 14. Many former judges of Delhi HC shared the view of the PIL petitioner and said only a thorough investigation by a probe agency could unravel the money trail. In the writ petition filed through advocate Vaibhav Niti, Justice Varma asked why Delhi Police and Delhi Fire Service personnel, who discovered the cash, did not seize it or prepare a 'panchnama', which alone could have been admissible evidence. He accused then CJI Khanna of subjecting him to a media trial by uploading unsubstantiated material against him on the SC's official website. Repatriated to Allahabad HC during the inquiry, the judge said the panel's report was handed over to him on May 4 and the then CJI 'advised him to resign or seek voluntary retirement by 7pm on May 6, failing which the CJI would 'intimate competent authority to initiate action for his removal''. The judge, who had been barred from judicial work, said he was denied a personal hearing he had sought, as per the in-house procedure, before the CJI and senior SC judges, prior to the CJI sending the recommendation to the President and the PM on May 8, just five days before CJI Khanna retired. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now He requested that SC declare the CJI's recommendation unconstitutional and ultra vires. He also questioned the constitutional validity of the in-house procedure that empowered the CJI to recommend removal of a constitutional court judge. This in-house process 'creates a parallel, extra-constitutional mechanism that derogates from the mandatory framework under Articles 124 and 218 of the Constitution, which exclusively vest powers for removal of judges of high courts in Parliament through an address supported by a special majority, following an inquiry under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968', he said. Justice Varma said power to remove constitutional court judges was given to Parliament by the Constitution after conducting a thorough trial of the charges against a judge with in-built safeguards including framing of charges, cross-examination, and proof beyond reasonable doubt for 'proven misbehaviour'. Thus, the in-house procedure, as far as it usurps parliamentary procedure to recommend removal of judges, violates the doctrine of separation of powers. Judiciary cannot assume the role reserved for the legislature in the removal of judges, Justice Varma said. He said the Constitution conferred no disciplinary or superintendence power with the CJI over HC or SC judges. Thus, the CJI cannot assume, through in-house procedure, an unregulated authority to act as the arbiter of the fate of HC and SC judges, he said. Justice Varma's challenge mirrors the line Sibal took on his YouTube show last week to dissect the inquiry report with panellists: former SC judges Justices Madan Lokur and Sanjay Kaul and ex-Delhi HC judge Justice Mukta Gupta. In the show, Sibal argued that the in-house inquiry was not consistent with constitutional provisions. Cong MPs to sign motion in LS against Justice Varma Congress MPs will sign the motion that govt will bring in Lok Sabha against Justice Yashwant Varma, with the party saying it will be done to set up a 3-member statutory panel which is required under Judges Inquiry Act before a judge's removal. Party general secretary Jairam Ramesh said opposition will also push govt to move on the motion to remove against Allahabad HC judge Shekhar Yadav, who is accused of making 'hate speech'. Ramesh slammed non-registration of an FIR against Varma, saying the entire process has been based on a report of the in-house panel of SC. He said Justice Yadav violated his oath with his speech but the notice to remove him is pending with Rajya Sabha chairman for past seven months.
Time of India
28 minutes ago
- Time of India
RTI Act a tool for empowerment, Adivasi women told
Vijayawada: State Information (RTI) commissioner Rehana Begum has urged Adivasi women to use the Right to Information (RTI) Act as a powerful tool for empowerment. She emphasised that awareness of the RTI Act can help tribal communities access crucial information about government schemes, services, and entitlements specifically meant for them. Rehana interacted with tribal women from Alluri Sitarama Raju (ASR), Manyam, and Prakasam districts during a virtual awareness programme on Friday. She noted that women in tribal regions often face challenges due to illiteracy and lack of access to information. However, she said that a culture of awareness and questioning can be fostered by identifying and training active and enthusiastic tribal women. Once equipped with knowledge of the RTI Act, these women can play a key role in resolving local issues by helping others obtain critical information. "State and central governments are spending huge amounts for the welfare and development of tribal populations across the country. It is your right to know how much money is coming to your village and your people. Take advantage of the RTI Act to get the details of the schemes and programmes," said Rehana Begum. She explained that awareness about the schemes would also help hold officials accountable and ensure proper implementation. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like An engineer reveals: One simple trick to get internet without a subscription Techno Mag Learn More Undo A lack of awareness, especially among tribal women, often leads to misappropriation or diversion of funds, she added. The five-day awareness programme, held in Anakapalli district from July 14 (Monday) to July 18 (Friday), was jointly organised by LibTech India and the United Forum for RTI Campaign–Andhra Pradesh, in collaboration with various voluntary organisations. Tribal women from Manyam, Alluri Sitarama Raju, and Prakasam districts participated in the event. Rehana Begum highlighted how such initiatives can have a lasting impact on women in remote tribal regions by deepening their understanding of rights and entitlements. She also noted that awareness campaigns by voluntary organisations complement the government's goal of empowering citizens through transparency. Representatives from LibTech India, including BDS Kishore, and members of the United Forum for RTI Campaign also participated in the event.
