Jolt to ex-DU prof, SC sets aside clean chit in Maoist case

The Supreme Court on Wednesday set aside the Bombay high court order acquitting former Delhi University professor GN Saibaba and four others for alleged Maoist links, and directed the high court to allocate a new bench to decide the matter afresh preferably within four months.

The court was hearing appeals filed by the Maharashtra government challenging the acquittal order passed on October 14 by the Nagpur bench of the Bombay high court. Before Saibaba and others could be released, Maharashtra approached the top court which held a special sitting on a Saturday and suspended the high court order.

The counsels for Saibaba consented to the order as the top court had noticed that the high court did not decide the matter on merits and acquitted the accused on the finding that valid sanction was not obtained or was lacking to invoke the draconian provisions under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). Additional solicitor general (ASG) SV Raju appearing for the state told the apex court that once the trial court at Gadchiroli in 2017 convicted the accused, the issue of sanction did not arise. He further submitted that the question of sanction was never raised during the trial.

A bench of justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar said, “In view of the consensus between both sides and without expressing any view on merits of the case, we set aside the judgment of the Nagpur bench of the Bombay high court.”

The court added, “The matters are remitted back to the high court to decide the matter afresh on all aspects including the question of sanction.” The court permitted Maharashtra to raise the objection on the necessity of sanction being valid or absent and allowed the accused led by senior advocates R Basanth, Nithya Ramakrishnan and Shadan Farasat to respond to the same.

To avoid apprehensions of any bias, the court requested the chief justice of the Bombay high court to place the matter before a bench other than the one which heard and decided the case. “We request the high court to decide and dispose the appeals at the earliest and preferably within four months of receiving this order,” the Supreme Court bench said.

On October 15, while suspending the HC order, the top court had held, “The offences of which the accused were convicted are very serious against the interest of the society and integrity of the country.” 59-year old Saibaba, who is 90% disabled and is wheelchair-bound had submitted to the top court through his lawyers that while he may have ideological inclinations, he was not involved in any criminal activity. But the top court dismissed his arguments by claiming that for Maoist and terrorist activities, “brain” plays an important role than physical activity.

The high court while acquitting all the accused found the trial to be vitiated for want of valid or no sanction under UAPA. The HC said that a civil, democratic society cannot afford to sacrifice the procedural safeguards provided under law while dealing with state’s unwavering resolve to wage war against terror.

Along with Saibaba, the other accused were Mahesh Tirki, Hem Keshwdatta Mishra, Prashant Rahi, and VIjay Nan Tirki. One of the accused Pandu Narote died in custody at Nagpur Central jail prior to the high court order.