23-05-2025
Justice Oka: The people's judge, a champion of liberty
On May 23, as we say goodbye to Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka, who started his legal practice at the Thane District Court, it is an occasion to let his judgments do the talking. He championed free speech, liberty and equality. He has been instrumental in relaxing bail conditions in special statutes like the UAPA, and often came down heavily on authorities for arbitrary and illegal demolitions.
In Sheikh Zahid Mukhtar's case (2016), a bench comprising Justice Oka struck down two amendments to the Maharashtra Animal Prevention Act, 1976. It was held that Section 5D (incriminating possession of flesh of any cow, bull, etc, slaughtered outside Maharashtra) infringed the right to privacy. This was done at a time when privacy had yet to be recognised as a fundamental right in K S Puttaswamy's case (2017).
The arrests of students, political activists have become frequent and securing bail has turned out to be a tedious exercise. But in Jalaluddin Khan vs Union of India (2024), Justice Oka held that even in UAPA, bail is the rule and jail is the exception. In February 2025, pulling up the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for keeping Indian Telecommunication Service officer Arun Kumar Tripathi in custody under PMLA, Oka said, 'Concept of PMLA cannot be to ensure that a person should remain in jail.'
In a PIL filed by Tushar Gandhi, a bench of Justice Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan reaffirmed that the Uttar Pradesh government must bear the educational expenses — including tuition, uniforms, books, and transport — of a seven-year-old Muslim boy who was assaulted by classmates in Muzaffarnagar in 2023 after a teacher allegedly made communal remarks and instigated her students. The bench emphasised that while charitable organisations or schools could provide assistance, the primary responsibility lies with the state.
During Covid, anti-CAA protests were on the rise across the country and Section 144 was imposed in Bengaluru in December 2019. Justice Oka, back then, was the Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court, and in Sowmya R Reddy's case (2020), he said the prohibitory order under Section 144 was illegal and violative of the fundamental right to hold peaceful protests.
A bench led by Justice Oka also came to the rescue of a professor who was charged under Section 153A for updating his WhatsApp status, which was critical of the abrogation of Article 370. The Court in Javed Ahmad's case (2024) not only quashed the criminal case against the professor but also observed that if every criticism or protest against the state is to be held as an offence under 153A, then democracy will not survive.
In Zulfiquar Haider's case (April 2025), calling the act of demolition 'illegal and arbitrary', Justice Oka came down heavily on the Prayagraj Development Authority and other state authorities for demolishing the houses of six individuals and directed them to pay Rs 10 lakh each to the aggrieved. He remarked, 'There is something called the right to shelter and due process.'
In contrast to the Ali Khan Mahmudabad case (May 2025), when a bench led by Justice Surya Kant, even after granting interim bail, remarked that one must be careful while expressing their opinion, Justice Oka, in Abdul Sathar's case (May 2025), granted bail to a Popular Front of India secretary and observed that we cannot put someone in jail because of their ideology.
He will be remembered not only for his judgments but also for his commitment to promoting litigation, pushing young lawyers to take up pro bono cases and reconstructing bail jurisprudence in the case of special statutes like UAPA and the PMLA. He will remain a beacon of hope and an inspiration.
Upon his retirement, he must have looked forward to cherishing moments with his own. Yet, in a cruel twist of fate, he lost his mother, who passed away on May 21. Still, he returned to the bench on his final day, delivering 11 judgments with remarkable resolve. His influence will remain, ensuring that compassion, integrity, and tireless service shape future generations.
The writer is an advocate practising at the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow
