Akansha Upadhyay
Published on -19 November 2022 at 19:47 IST
In its detailed order granting bail to Anand Teltumbde on merits, the Bombay High Court said prima facie “it cannot be concluded that Teltumbde has indulged in a terrorist act,” in the Bhima Koregaon – Elgaar Parishad Case.
A division bench of Justices AS Gadkari and Milind Jadhav served that Sections 16 (punishment for the terrorist act), 18 (punishment for conspiracy), and 20 (Punishment for being a member of a terrorist gang or organisation) of Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) were prima facie not made out.
The bench said that “at the highest” at this stage Teltumbde could be charged with being a member of CPI(Maoist), for which the punishment was for 10 years in prison.
Significantly, the Court said that Section 20 “cannot be interpreted to mean that merely being a member of a terrorist gang would entail such a member for the above punishment. An important issue here is the terrorist act, which is required by the Court to see the material present before the Court to show that such a person is involved in or has indulged in a terrorist act. A terrorist act is very widely defined under Section 15.”
“In the present case, seizure of the incriminating material as alluded to hereinabove does not in any manner prima facie lead to drawing an inference that, the Appellant has committed or indulged in a ‘terrorist act’ as contemplated under Section 15 of the UAPA Act.”
Teltumbde, 73, was arrested by the NIA on April 14, 2020, after he surrendered before the agency following Supreme Court orders. NIA has accused him of being the Convenor of the Elgar Parishad conference held on December 31, 2017, which allegedly led to violence at Bhima Koregaon the following day, resulting in the death of one person. The agency claimed that Teltumbde is an active member of the banned CPI (Maoists) and was “deeply involved in the furtherance of its agenda.”
After analysis, the Bombay High Court noted that prima facie the five letters cited against Anand Teltumbde, allegedly recovered from co-accused Rona Wilson’s laptop would fall under the “realm of presumption” which would need “further corroboration.”
One such letter was by ‘Prakash’ to ‘Anand. The court rejected NIA’s contention that the letter was enough to invoke section 15 of UAPA and said such contention was “prima facie not acceptable” and “palatable.”
The court noted that Teltumbde had travelled extensively for giving lectures at prestigious institutes like the London School of Economics, Harvard University, MIT, and Michigan University and merely because his brother was a wanted CPI (Maoist) accused doesn’t implicate him in his alleged links to the banned organisation.
The Special NIA court while rejecting Teltumbde’s bail had said that letters cited against him could not be analyzed as it would amount to a mini-trial. However, the HC has said that the “court must look into the contents of the document and take such document into account as it is.”
The High Court observed that these documents were the fulcrum of NIA’s case. “NIA has submitted that prima facie reading of these documents reveals that Appellant is an active member of CPI (M) and has been involved in activities to further its ideology to overthrow the state.”
“However, looking at the contents of the documents the aforesaid submission of NIA would fall in the realm of presumption according to us which may need further corroboration.”
The court noted that the Bhima Koregaon incident resulted in one person’s death. However, based on the draft charges and charge sheet “we prima facie find that NIA has not investigated or made any investigation in respect of this aspect,” the court said.
While it observed that NIA’s case alleged the CPI (Maoist) using the Elgaar Parishad to further a ‘larger conspiracy, the material on record was not adequate to charge him to the sections.
Teltumbde was represented by Senior Advocate Mihir Desai and Advocate Devyani Kulkarni while the NIA was represented by SPP Sandesh Patil.