Supreme Court Says Accused In Bhima Koregaon Case Are Not Allowing Trial To Proceed; Accused Seek Adjournment To Produce Documents
Counsel for Surendra Gadling in the Maoist link case sought an adjournment to produce documents to show that the accused are not delaying the trial in the Bhima Koregaon case.
The Supreme Court, today granted an adjournment in the bail applications of Surendra Gadling and Jyoti Jagtap in the Maoist link case after the Senior Advocate appearing for Gadling requested for an adjournment to produce documents.
"Lordship may give me time to produce all the documents", Senior Advocate Anand Grover appearing for Surendra Gadling submitted and the Court agreed.
The request for an adjournment to produce the documents was made after the Bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Rajesh Bindal observed that the trial in the Bhima Koregaon case is being delayed by the Accused by filing one discharge application after another.
Anand Grover started his submissions by saying that the allegations against his client are based on the documents seized in the Bhima Koregaon Case. "I am accused there. I am an Advocate. I have been representing the people who belong to the so-called Maoist party".
Justice Bindal responded, “Not only representing, lot of other things. The trial, the accused is not allowing to proceed.”
Grover replied, "No. That is not correct. I will show. In Bhima Koregaon, 207 proceedings are going on…I will show you the order.”
Justice Bindal further said, “Discharge applications are filed... Not filed?”
Grover said, “Filed, but 207 proceedings were going on…those orders are not here my lord. Can we produce those orders? Something that my lords are saying against me, I must produce those orders. There is a 207 order, the learned judge has held in the order that the delay is on their part…”
Justice Bindal said, “We can see it from the website that discharge applications are filed one after the other, one after the other.”
To which Grover responded, “They are filed, no doubt.”
Additional Solicitor General SV Raju appearing on behalf of the National Investigating Agency (NIA) intervened, “Either they take inspection of the document, and then delay inspection…”
Justice Bindal asked, “Then produce everything.”
Grover said, “I will produce everything…give me a date…Your Lordships may give me time to file all the documents. I am very happy because what your lordship is thinking, putting it against me, I will have to satisfy your lordships. ”
Grover further requested the Bench to grant him two weeks to file all the documents. Consequently, the Court granted him three weeks to produce all the documents.
The Criminal Appeal was filed on behalf of Surender Gadling, seeking bail in the Bhima Koregaon Case. An FIR was registered under Sections 307, 341, 342, 435, 323, 504, 506, 143, 147, 148, 149 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), Sections 5 and 28 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959 (IA Act), Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 (MP Act) and Sections 16, 18, 20 and 23 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAP Act). Gadling filed a bail application before the Sessions Court, which was rejected. Further, the Bombay High Court also upheld the rejection of the bail, against which, he moved the Supreme Court.
Also listed today was the appeal filed by the NIA challenging the bail granted to co-accused Mahesh Raut. Senior Advocate Mihir Desai appeared virtually for Raut in the NIA's appeal. He told the Court that the order of the High Court had been stayed by the Apex Court.
Cause Title: Surendra Pundalik Gadling v. The State of Maharashtra (Crl.A. No. 3742/2023)
