NIA Probe Challenged In Bombay High Court By Two Accused in the Elgar Parishad Case

Must Read

US Court Orders Iran To Pay $1.4 BN in Damages To Missing Former FBI Agent’s Family

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia ordered Iran to pay in total $1.45 bn to...

Onus on Petitioner To Show Unassailable Facts: Delhi High Court

In the case of Rhythm Jain v National Testing Agency, the Delhi High Court mentioned that in such petitions the...

Under-Trial/Convicted Persons Do Not Have Absolute Right To Parole in Light of Coronavirus : Bombay High Court

An important judgment was given by the Division Bench of the Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court concerning the...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Asks State To File Reply To Examine Whether Privacy Rights of an Individual Can Be Violated by Issuing an Executive...

A Writ Petition was instituted by an individual for violation of his fundamental rights by the State before the...

Bombay High Court Allows Export of Pending Consignment of Onions in Respect of Which Shipping Bills Have Been Generated Before Notification of the Ban

A writ petition challenging the notification dated 14th September 2020 to ban the export of onions was filed by...

Delhi HC: Mens Rea Essential Before Passing an Order U/S 14b of EPF Act

  In the matter of M/s Durable Doors and Windows v APFC, Gurugram, the bench allowed the Petitioner's appeal holding...

Follow us

The human rights lawyer and the writer-activist accused in Elgar Parishad case approached the Bombay High Court. They alleged the transfer of probe from Pune Police to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) as ‘politically motivated’.

Brief Facts of the Case

A coalition of 260 non-profit organizations organized the event called as Elgar Parishad. This was organised on 31.12.2017. The event commemorated 200th anniversary of the Battle of Bhima- Koregaon. This was at the Shaniwarwada Fort in Pune.

The victory was vital to the Mahar Dalits. It signified their victory over Brahmin Peshwas. Hence, the event was based on the anti-caste theme.

 On 01.01.2018, violence broke out at the event. The Pune Police arrested several persons under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). It also claimed the speeches during the event partly responsible for the violence.

Soon after, the Police arrested some high-profile activists and lawyers, it alleged their active links to the CPI (Maoist), a threat to national security. The charge sheet mentioned the event as ‘creating communal disharmony’. 

 In November 2019, the elected government in Maharashtra had to re-examine the case. However, transfer of the probe to NIA was immediately done after BJP lost state elections. Advocate Surendra Gadling and Activist Sudhir Dhawale challenged the move on 19.06.2020.

Contentions by the Petitioner

The petitioners contended the transfer to be arbitrary, unjust and discriminatory. That, it violated Article 14, 20 and 21 of the Constitution. 

The Central Government passed the order on 24.02.2020. The gap between the police investigation and decision taken was 750 days. According to Section 6(3) of the NIA Act, the Centre could exercise such powers within the statutory period of 15 days.

Hence, they claim the order to be a fraud on the legislature and in sheer abuse of the statutory mandate. Further, it suffers illegality on account of the doctrine of waiver and promissory estoppel. 

Further, the petitioners claim it as a ‘political expediency’ and unreasoned order. The Centre passed the order only after BJP failed to form the government in Maharashtra. It may avoid the humiliation of being exposed to the manipulated investigation. Moreover, it does not specify the reasons for transferring the investigation. Thus, the State Police’s investigation was deemed  satisfactory for one and a half year.

The plea states the order as ‘interference with the administration of justice’. It cannot order a de-novo investigation into a matter in cognizance of the competent Court. It did not make out any case of bias or malafides before the Court.

The petitioners also challenged the territorial jurisdiction of Additional Judge, Pune and demanded a transfer of the probe which is contrary to Section 13 and 22 of the NIA Act. 

The petitioners have not received copies of electronic evidence despite the Trial Court orders. They said that NIA might indulge in procuring fabricated evidence. Hence, there is an urgent need to restrain NIA from any further investigation.

Prayer for Relief 

The petitioners filed the matter under Article 226 of the Constitution. As well as Section 482 of CrPC.

The Petition seeks the Bombay High Court to quash the impugned order dated 24.01.2020 which transfers probe to NIA. 

The Court may set aside the order passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Pune to transfer the records and proceedings. Moreover, the Court may grant an interim injunction to restrain NIA from carrying out any investigation. 


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

US Court Orders Iran To Pay $1.4 BN in Damages To Missing Former FBI Agent’s Family

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia ordered Iran to pay in total $1.45 bn to the Levinson family in punitive...

Onus on Petitioner To Show Unassailable Facts: Delhi High Court

In the case of Rhythm Jain v National Testing Agency, the Delhi High Court mentioned that in such petitions the onus to prove the facts...

Under-Trial/Convicted Persons Do Not Have Absolute Right To Parole in Light of Coronavirus : Bombay High Court

An important judgment was given by the Division Bench of the Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court concerning the constitutionality of Rule 19 of...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Asks State To File Reply To Examine Whether Privacy Rights of an Individual Can Be Violated by Issuing an Executive...

A Writ Petition was instituted by an individual for violation of his fundamental rights by the State before the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The...

Bombay High Court Allows Export of Pending Consignment of Onions in Respect of Which Shipping Bills Have Been Generated Before Notification of the Ban

A writ petition challenging the notification dated 14th September 2020 to ban the export of onions was filed by the Exporters Association before the...

Delhi HC: Mens Rea Essential Before Passing an Order U/S 14b of EPF Act

  In the matter of M/s Durable Doors and Windows v APFC, Gurugram, the bench allowed the Petitioner's appeal holding that mens rea is an...

Delhi HC: Language of Statement and Testimony of Complainant Need Not Be Identical

A single-judge bench of J. Vibhu Bakhru of the Delhi High Court upheld the accused's conviction in Kailash @ Balli v State. The bench...

COVID Results Shall Be Conveyed To the Person Within 24 Hours: Delhi High Court

The order has come in a writ petition moved by Rakesh Malhotra. The Petitioner herein seeks to ramp up testing facilities in Delhi.   Facts of...

Delhi High Court Sets Aside the Order of the Trial Court in the Chief Secretary Assault Case

In the case of Mr. Arvind Kejriwal & Anr. V. State NCT of Delhi, Mr.Justice Suresh Kumar Kait has set aside the 24.07.2019 Order...

Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Vintage Moments’ Alcohol Sale in Case of Trademark Infringement

The manufacturers of the Alcohol Brand Magic Moments had filed a suit. The Delhi High Court has passed an order restraining the manufacturing, marketing,...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -