New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday affirmed the revival of a UAPA case against Assam MLA Akhil Gogoi in connection with the violence during the protests against CAA in 2019 but adds Gogoi will remain on bail during the pendency of the case.
A bench of Justices V. Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal however granted bail to the Assamese legislative assembly member during pendency of the trial, subject to such terms and conditions as may be imposed by special court.
The High Court had remanded the discharge application for fresh consideration after finding fault with the trail court for not granting sufficient time to the NIA to contest the matter.
The Supreme Court had reserved its verdict in Gogoi’s appeal in March after hearing the submissions from the parties. Senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi told the court that sending the embattled legislator back to jail after being ‘at liberty’ for almost two years on the basis of flimsy evidence, some of which was from before 2009 would be a ‘travesty’ of justice. Besides, the high court ought not to have made observations on the merits of the case while setting aside the discharge order and remanding it to the trial court, the senior counsel submitted. Therefore, he urged the top court to first, modify the high court’s order to the extent that it refused Gogoi’s ancillary prayer for bail and grant him protection from arrest, and second, direct that the trial court ought to consider the matter remanded to it, “without being truncated by the observations of the high court”. “This is clear case of political vendetta,” Ahmadi further asserted in defence of the Assamese legislative assembly member.
These contentions were vehemently opposed by Additional Solicitor-General Aishwarya Bhati who appeared for the National Investigation Agency. She argued that the opposite side was attempting to minimise the seriousness of the allegations against the accused. She said, “Maoist organisations are making the country bleed by a hundred cuts, if not a thousand cuts. They are waging a war against the government, especially the security agencies, which are our protectors. The rule of law itself is threatened by these organisations.”
Comments are closed.