SC to Hear Plea of Gautam Navlakha Against his House Arrest, NIA Raise ‘Safety Concerns’

Gautam Navlakha Law Insider

Savvy Thakur

Published on: 17 November 2022 at 21:36 IST

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) raised safety concerns regarding the premises in Navi Mumbai where activist Gautam Navlakha had proposed to live during his house arrest, which resulted in yet another delay in the release of the accused in the Elgar Parishad-Maoists links case.

During the day, veteran actor Suhasini Mulay appeared before Special NIA judge Rajesh Katariya and offered to be Navlakha’s surety, which the court accepted.

According to sources, Navlakha’s lawyers, Advocates Yug Chaudhry, Wahab Khan, and Chandni Chawla, were likely to petition the Supreme Court following the Special NIA court’s decision.

“It would not be proper to keep the accused under house arrest in the given premises,” the judge stated in his order, “since there is strong objection on the part of the prosecution (NIA) for keeping the accused in the premises on account of safety and security of the accused.”

In addition, the court stated that it would not be appropriate to transfer the accused there until further instructions from the Supreme Court, as the special public prosecutor had also stated that the prosecution would submit a report of the evaluation of the premises.

Since April 2020, the 70-year-old Navlakha has been imprisoned, claiming to have multiple ailments. In response to his petition, the Supreme Court granted Navlakha house arrest for a month on November 10 and ordered that the order be carried out within 48 hours.

Be that as it may, the delivery was postponed as vital customs were not finished.

Navlakha’s counsel Chaudhry informed the court of the order from the Supreme Court. He stated that Navlakha’s release from the Taloja prison in Navi Mumbai’s neighbor has been “inexorably delayed,” urging the court to prevent any further delay.

“The Supreme Court has waived the requirements for a solvency certificate… It is the lordship’s responsibility to ensure that he is released today. There were some issues related to surety.”

The lawyer claimed that the NIA was “dragging its feet”. According to Chaudhry, the central agency was required to submit two reports within 48 hours of the SC order: evaluation and inspection of the house and verification of the surety. However, neither report has been submitted yet.

Prakash Shetty, a counsel for the NIA, presented the required reports to the special court around 4:30 p.m. The prosecutor claimed, citing the report, that Navlakha’s residence was not a “safe place.” He stated that the building had three points of entry and exit, but there was no CCTV camera over the backside entry.

Mr. Shetty added that one of the conditions imposed by the Supreme Court was the installation of CCTV cameras at entry and exit points. The building was owned by a “secretary of the Communist Party,” according to the NIA report, who has been its manager for 25 to 30 years.

The NIA stated that it would be “very difficult to keep vigil on the accused” because there was a public library on the ground floor.

After that, the court issued an order prohibiting the accused from being placed under house arrest at the chosen location.

The judge put off the matter until November 25 so that the discharge and other applications could be heard. Meanwhile, actor Suhasini Mulay made an appearance in court on Wednesday and stated that she would serve as Navlakha’s surety.

As part of the verification process, the 71-year-old actress, best known for her roles in “Bhuvan Shome” and “Hu Tu Tu,” appeared in court. Ms. Mulay stated that she would be serving as Navlakha’s surety in response to a question from the judge.

According to Ms. Mulay, she has known him for more than 30 years because he is from Delhi, where she had lived for some time.

Ms. Mulay stated that she had never appeared in court and had never stood as surety for anyone prior to this.She was accepted as surety by the court. A surety promises that a person who will be released from prison will appear before the court whenever it is required.

The case involves alleged incendiary remarks delivered at the “Elgar Parishad” conclave in Pune on December 31, 2017, according to the police, which they claim led to violence the following day near the Koregaon-Bhima war memorial on the outskirts of the western Maharashtra city.

The Pune police claimed that the program had been organized by people connected to banned Naxalite groups. The NIA was later given control of the case, in which more than a dozen academics and activists have been named as suspects.

Related Post