The injustice of a trial choose filling the gaps within the prosecution’s case (which relied on ‘proof’ within the type of bananas, umbrellas and newspaper cuttings) with judicial overreach to cut ten years off Professor G.N. Saibaba’s life.
—
THE Nagpur Bench of the Bombay Excessive Court docket heard the enchantment in opposition to the conviction of Prof. G.N. Saibaba and 5 others, twice. In each the judgments, it put aside the conviction.
The listening to was held in a totally packed courtroom with, at instances, hot-tempered exchanges of robust arguments. Evidently the ambiance was terribly tense.
Nonetheless, one proposition of Pradip Mandhyan turned out to be so hilarious— though hard-hitting— that your entire courtroom would burst into laughter each time it was talked about. He identified that probably the most incriminating gadgets was lacking.
And the lacking article was a banana. Sure, a banana.
The ten-year-long ordeal of the six ‘City Naxals’ ended on March 5, 2024. Saying the judgment within the court docket stuffed with legal professionals and journalists, the in any other case calm and soft-spoken Justice Joshi gave the impression to be in a very completely different temper.
His voice agency, resolute, decided and unusually loud, conveyed that they have been delivering well-deserved justice by overturning the conviction.
The ten-year-long ordeal of the six ‘City Naxals’ ended on March 5, 2024.
Merely put, the judgment mentioned what we legal professionals usually say: “There was nothing within the matter”.
Nothing value a conviction.; actually, nothing worthy even of a trial.
The conviction by the trial court docket had come as a shock to everybody, besides the police. The case was made sensational proper from the primary day.
Expenses ‘severe’ sufficient to be hospitalised
Whereas the primary spherical of hearings in enchantment earlier than the excessive court docket went principally unnoticed by the nationwide media, its judgment created uproar. Even earlier than the ink may dry, the State went in enchantment within the Supreme Court docket on the exact same day.
Additionally learn: DU Faculty Terminates Jailed Prof Saibaba; ‘Extra Hardships Forward,’ Rues His Spouse
The then to-be Chief Justice of India, Dr D.Y. Chandrachud, refused an pressing itemizing. Nonetheless, inside a short while, the Supreme Court docket convened a particular Bench on a Saturday morning to listen to the matter.
The specifically constituted Bench consisting of Justices M.R. Shah and Bela Trivedi gave an unprecedented keep on the acquittal. Moreover, it refused to grant medical bail and even home arrest to the ailing, 90 p.c disabled, wheelchair-bound professor.
What was in any other case a one-sided case was changed into a extremely contested one by the State, because it fielded a few of its greatest pleaders. The very best of legal professionals superior a few of the most novel technical arguments.
Bail purposes have been opposed tooth and nail. Though all six appellants have been on bail throughout the trial, their bail, pending the enchantment, was rejected. In one of many hearings, the particular prosecutor even admitted, on document, that there isn’t a act of terrorism, attributed, proved or alleged in opposition to any of those individuals, but bail was rejected.
When Saibaba utilized for parole to go to his ailing mom, even that was rejected. The fees have been ‘severe’; the love of a son for his mom may wait.
Over seven years, no less than 4 particular prosecutors have been appointed. When the bail software of Professor Saibaba was about to be moved, his lawyer Surendra Gadling was arrested and booked below the Illegal Actions (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA) within the notorious Bhima Koregaon–Elgar Parishad case, and has been in jail ever since.
Throughout each listening to, high-rank law enforcement officials would sit within the courtroom. Within the first spherical, when the investigating officer was not glad with the arguments made by the senior counsel showing for the State, he determined to make some arguments himself to elucidate how “City Naxals” function.
Merely put, the judgment mentioned what we legal professionals usually say— “There was nothing within the matter”.
When the court docket requested a really fundamental query on the outset, he was left speechless, after which quietly vanished from the courtroom throughout the lunch break. Within the second spherical, the State modified the particular counsel.
In each rounds of enchantment that befell within the excessive court docket, of the assorted factors argued, one of many main contentions was that of “bias of the trial choose”.
Additionally learn: Unusual case of G.N. Saibaba and the Supreme Court docket, one other new irregular
Assailing the judgment of the trial court docket, advocate Pradip Mandhyan would strenuously name it the end result of a “perverse, corrupt and dishonest” act on the a part of the presiding officer.
He had all the explanations to say so. Other than what has been held within the judgment of the excessive court docket on the character of proof, just a few info would reveal the actual foundation of this argument.
A 1,000 pages of perversity, corruption and dishonesty
The judgment rendered by the trial court docket, which may even be seen on numerous on-line platforms, runs into a few thousand pages.
After holding all six individuals responsible, in Paragraph 1,013, the realized classes choose says, “[I]n my opinion, the imprisonment for all times can be not a adequate punishment to the accused however the arms of the court docket are closed with the mandate of Part 18 and 20 of UAPA and for my part it’s a match case to award sentence of life imprisonment to accused.” (sic).
Which means thereby, that the court docket needed to condemn them to dying, however its arms have been closed (tied) for the legislation didn’t present for such punishment below the invoked provision.
The timeline of the case, if seen, will bear out that the statements of the accused below Part 313 of the Code of Felony Process have been recorded properly as much as January 9, 2017.
Thereafter, oral submissions by the counsels started, which stretched for a few month. Finally on February 9, 2017, the defence filed its written be aware, and the matter was reserved for judgment.
Two weeks later, i.e., on February 28, 2017, the matter once more appeared on the board, for the prosecution needed to quote some judgments.
Whereas the primary spherical of hearings in enchantment earlier than the excessive court docket went principally unnoticed by nationwide media, its judgment created uproar.
In lower than a month since reserving the judgment, at 1 p.m. on March 7, 2017, the classes court docket at Gadchiroli pronounced the judgment working into 827 pages, holding all six responsible.
All six have been known as upon to make submissions on sentences to be awarded. The defence counsel, Surendra Gadling, refused to make any submissions. Prashant Rahi, Hem Mishra, Vijay Nan Tirki and Saibaba additionally refused to make any submissions. Nobody believed that this was a case the place a conviction may have been given.
Additionally learn: Bhima Koregaon: The method continues to clot as punishment as one other 12 months passes by
By 3 p.m. on the identical day, the realized choose pronounced the sentence of life to 5 and 10 years to Vijay, with causes working into 14 pages. Every certainly one of them was handed over a duplicate of the judgment proper then and there, i.e., prints of about 5,000 pages.
Rendering such a cumbersome judgment in lower than 30 days is just not unattainable. It may be accomplished, after all. However that alone needn’t increase eyebrows.
In distinction, within the first spherical, the excessive court docket took about 15 days to render its judgment of about 100 pages restricted to the difficulty of sanction, whereas within the second spherical, it took almost 175 days to render a 293-page verdict.
The trial court docket felt life imprisonment was not adequate as a result of it blamed the Communist Celebration of India (CPI) (Maoist) and the Maoist motion in India for the non-industrialisation of the Gadchiroli district in Maharashtra.
The trial court docket held, “Gadchiroli district at this time is identical because it was within the 12 months 1982 and for that the accused no.1 to six and members of banned organisation CPI (Maoist) and its frontal organisation Revolutionary Democratic Entrance (RDF) are accountable.”
It gave numerous statistics that have been by no means cited on the Bar and the supply of which is talked about to be “authorities data”. The trial court docket held that Saibaba, although 90 p.c disabled, is mentally match, and is a “suppose tank” and “excessive profile chief” of CPI (Maoist).
To attract these conclusions and never give a dying sentence, the realized choose accepted the case of the prosecution, not simply in its entirety, however even over and past what it was.
The trial court docket referred to even that materials that not one of the prosecution witnesses had even uttered of their depositions.
From the hoard of fabric that was “dumped” by the prosecution within the type of so-called digital proof, the trial court docket pulled out a wide range of distinctive incriminating supplies. One among which was a “banana”.
Additionally learn: “What I knew within the summary I used to be now residing, feeling and observing”: An interview with Sudha Bharadwaj
Not only a banana, a newspaper and an umbrella too. The court docket had discovered from the cache of literature, one specific newspaper article, which talked about that Naxals supposedly carried “banana, umbrella and newspaper” as code to determine one another (i.e., to determine extremely secretive Maoists).
The trial choose held, “[I]n order to determine the members of CPI Maoist or RDF organisation by an unknown particular person the distinctive identification, i.e., Banana, Umbrella and Newspaper have been used.”
Did the investigating officer name it the modus operandi of ‘City Naxals’? The reply isn’t any. Did any witness of the prosecution say that this was the modus operandi? The reply is one other no. Nobody mentioned it, nobody hinted about it.
What was in any other case a one-sided case was made right into a extremely contested one by the State, because it fielded a few of its greatest pleaders.
One journalist had written it in certainly one of her articles. Was she examined as a witness by the prosecution? No.
Nonetheless, the merchandise grew to become a deadly piece of ‘proof’ for the defence, in that the journalist in query had written in her article that she carried these three gadgets to fulfill Naxals. Therefore proved that this stuff are incriminatory articles. Possession of which, inter alia, proved an individual to be a Naxal for whom life imprisonment was not punishment sufficient.
The following query could be: Had been any of the accused within the case discovered possessing any of those three gadgets? The reply isn’t any, probably not. However Pandu Narote was discovered carrying an umbrella when he was arrested which was in August, a season of rains.
Prashant Rahi, who was arrested a few week later, was discovered carrying not only a full full intact newspaper, however he even carried cuttings of newspaper.
(Perhaps he simply needed to make sure that in case he loses the newspaper he may flash round cuttings to draw his fellow secretive Naxals hiding within the dense forest.)
Anybody with a banana? No.
Additionally learn: Experiments with fact, Half 2: Reality and dare in Bhima Koregaon
Maybe the prosecution may have made an argument that the incriminating proof, i.e., bananas, have been eaten by these individuals and, subsequently, they’ve dedicated one other offence of destroying proof.
However that was additionally to not be. The prosecution didn’t utter a phrase about this so-called modus operandi and the totally most incriminating gadgets.
The realized choose, nevertheless, held that since Prashant Rahi was discovered possessing a newspaper, “Therefore, in peculiar info and circumstances of the case discovering of the each day newspaper Dainik Bhaskar will be thought-about as incriminating proof in opposition to accused no. 4 Prashant Rahi.”
Figments of panchnamas
The search, seizure and arrest of Prashant Rahi is one other episode through which the court docket didn’t discover any fault. The prosecution alleged that they obtained secret data that the second messenger (Prashant Rahi, the primary one being Hem Mishra) was going to be at Devri, a distant city in Gadchiroli, on September 1, 2013, to fulfill senior Naxals to cross on some secret message.
Accordingly, a crew that was already within the space trying to find one Pahadsing was given this data. Who gave that data to the search occasion? Neither the recipient said it, nor the giver said it.
Throughout each listening to, high-rank law enforcement officials could be sitting within the courtroom.
Anyhow, the knowledge was that an accused within the case was within the Raipur space and the search occasion ought to seek for him. Did the knowledge include a bodily description of the particular person to be regarded for? Not said. Did they know the identify of the accused? Not said.
Accordingly, the prosecution declare went on, they went to Raipur whereby they discovered that the accused had gone in the direction of Devri in a four-wheeler. So, they went to Devri.
There, two individuals (Prashant Rahi and Vijay Nan Tirki) have been intercepted at “a crowded junction”. They have been taken in custody (at 4:30 p.m. on the identical day, i.e., September 1, 2013) as they have been in a “suspicious situation”.
Additionally learn: Can Father Stan Swamy’s PIL be the blueprint for justice to hundreds of undertrials lodged below UAPA?
They have been discovered to be possessing “Maowadi” (Maoist) and “Naxal literature”. Upon merely being requested, they revealed their actual id. Then, as per instructions of the sub-divisional police officer (SDPO) Suhas Bawache, they have been delivered to Aheri at 5 a.m. the following day, i.e., September 2, 2013. No arrest or seizure panchnama was drawn on the spot or at Devri. It got here to be drawn at Aheri the following day.
The panch witness to this seizure said that he had gone to the police station for this panchnama on September 2, 2013 within the night at 5:45 p.m.
It was throughout this search once more that Prashant Rahi was discovered possessing Maoist literature. Which means that after about 24 hours since his custody, he continued to own the mentioned Maoist literature.
(Maybe the police occasion discovered incriminating materials with them at Devri Chichgad T level, learn it and returned it actually to the accused for it belonged to them, and seized it the following day at their leisure. What was the tearing hurry?)
Now what was discovered within the possession of the accused after 24 hours of custody is equally attention-grabbing. A pockets containing some money, a PAN card, a driving license, 12 visiting playing cards, after all, a duplicate of the newspaper Dainik Bhaskar, one clear plastic folder containing 4 empty envelopes, photocopies of Dainik Bhaskar (newspaper chopping), just a few clean papers, just a few jail and court-related paperwork and “three English stapled Naxal organisation-related paperwork.”
The judgment rendered by the trial court docket, which may even be seen on numerous on-line platforms, runs into a few thousand pages.
(These three English-stappled Naxal organisation-related paperwork couldn’t be traced within the listening to earlier than the excessive court docket, although counsels of either side looked for them repeatedly and fervently).
Although the arms of the court docket have been “closed” by provisions of legislation, saving the accused from the gallows, it didn’t cease the court docket from allotting with the requirement of proof past cheap doubt and increasing the advantage of likelihood to the prosecution. It held, “Model of prosecution seems to be extra possible than the defence.”
Additionally learn: What’s Part 207 CrPC, a necessary piece of the Bhima Koregaon case puzzle?
Briefly, a terrorist on a mission carrying extraordinarily delicate secret data that was to be given to the senior terrorists hiding within the forest was so naïve that he carried with him all his id paperwork.
He didn’t simply carry one id card, however a number of ID playing cards, alongside together with his prepare tickets and visiting playing cards. He didn’t make an effort to hide his id and on mere asking revealed his true names alongside together with his different aliases.
The key data can solely be associated to court docket and jail paperwork, or newspaper cuttings of which photocopies have been discovered saved in a clear blue plastic folder.
Nobody is aware of what was in these stapled pages. The trial court docket has not commented on it in its judgment. All mentioned, the actual fact stays that Dainik Bhaskar, inter alia, sealed the destiny of Prashant Rahi.
Equally, Pandu Narote and Mahesh Tirki, who have been allegedly on a secret mission to move Hem Mishra secretly to senior Naxals within the distant forest, have been discovered carrying all id paperwork.
Pandu was discovered possessing not only one id doc, he was carrying his domicile certificates, caste certificates, financial institution passbook, his personal delivery certificates, the delivery certificates of his daughter, ration card, driving licence, election id card, college leaving certificates and a duplicate of the Lokmat newspaper.
Mahesh carried propaganda materials of Naxals, i.e., three pamphlets, all completely different, and naturally an election ID card.
Hem Mishra was carrying an ATM Card, PAN card, election ID card, college library id card, yatri card, railway ticket of Delhi to Ballarshah, one Kodak digital digicam with charger, a 16GB reminiscence card, and a duplicate of the Sahara newspaper.
Additionally learn: Bhima Koregaon: Supreme Court docket grants bail to Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira, with tethers
None of those three tried to hide their id. They gave away their true names. They didn’t even attempt to run away upon being intercepted.
Rendering such a cumbersome judgment in lower than 30 days is just not unattainable. It may be accomplished, after all. However that alone needn’t increase eyebrows.
The 16GB reminiscence card which contained “important Maoist communication and different Maoist paperwork in encrypted kind with the intention to additional actions of terrorist organisation CPI Maoist” to be handed over to a senior terrorist within the forest, contained a few of Hem Mishra’s personal private pictures, pictures of Prof Saibaba and his members of the family.
It additionally contained just a few films— actually boring ones. Not even value a reputation. Amongst all these contents, it was said that there have been incriminating paperwork. They have been incriminating solely as a result of they have been protected by a password.
There’s not a whisper as to what efforts have been taken to decrypt the password. However since they have been password protected, they have been termed incriminatory. May they be financial institution e-statements? Or earnings tax e-returns? Nobody is aware of.
A search to grab
The seizure on the home of Saibaba is one other episode. Round 50 high-ranking officers from Gadchiroli and Delhi have been occasion to this sensational raid. The home of Saibaba was situated in Delhi College Campus, surrounded by homes of many professors and college staff. But the witness chosen was an illiterate poor barber.
Admittedly, Saibaba and the panch have been locked outdoors the home whereas the search was happening. The panch himself requested that another educated particular person be made panch witness for he’s illiterate however that was not accepted.
Then again, Saibaba appealed in writing to take a search within the presence of professors or legal professionals who have been current, however that too was denied.
When the witness admitted being saved outdoors the home whereas the search was ongoing, the court docket discovered distinctive cause to offer no significance to that time.
The choose, in Paragraph 230 holds, “It’s to be famous that this witness is illiterate. He can not learn and write the English language and his cross-examination was held the entire day, that too by an eminent lawyer having standing observe of greater than 25 years and this witness may need been frightened due to the ambiance…
Additionally learn: 5 years of Bhima Koregaon arrests: CDRO marks ‘black day’
“Therefore, a stray admission … that he and the accused Saibaba (was) saved outdoors the home whereas taking home search … is just not a floor to discard model of the prosecution witness.”
Again to the day of the raid at Saiababa’s home. Admittedly, about 50 law enforcement officials have been inside the home, and together with them have been two cyber specialists. Full videography was accomplished of the seizures. After hours of search and seizure, they gathered all of the digital materials.
The trial court docket referred to even that materials that not one of the prosecution witnesses had even uttered of their depositions.
The seized materials was taken in a bag and the police left it. Identical to one goes to a vegetable market, stuffs numerous purchases within the bag and goes house desirous about which dish to prepare dinner from so many choices.
No hash worth was drawn or given because the legislation requires, nor have been the gadgets sealed to keep away from interference or manipulation. I repeat, there was no sealing.
Sure! Probably the most fundamental factor that’s accomplished in search and seizure— sealing. Placing seized articles in a canopy, after which sealing it with the signature of the panch witnesses, law enforcement officials, and so on. That was not accomplished. They solely drew a listing, and, like I mentioned, positioned it in a bag and left.
This occurred within the presence of two ‘cyber specialists’. These two ‘cyber specialists’ couldn’t differentiate between a Bluetooth gadget and a pen drive and therefore recorded that the attachment to the laptop computer was a pen drive.
This error was repeated even within the Aheri police station, the place one other ‘cyber professional’ known as the attachment to the laptop computer a pen drive. It was, nevertheless, within the evaluation report that the gadget connected to the laptop computer was discovered to be a Bluetooth gadget.
Surendra Gadling, cross-examining the investigating officer, requested him why the videography had not been filed on document. Is it as a result of within the videography law enforcement officials have been seen planting laborious discs and different supplies?
Additionally learn: Staying a bail Order, that too in a UAPA matter the place getting bail is already troublesome, is a travesty of justice
The witness mentioned, a CD of the videography was not offered by the Delhi police, though he had reminded them 4 instances.
How was the reminder given, written or oral? Reply, oral.
Within the excessive court docket, when the Bench requested the particular counsel to acquire that video recording and present it to the court docket, the prosecution mentioned it will get it. Nonetheless, the video recording by no means got here.
Maybe the prosecution may have made an argument that the incriminating proof, i.e., bananas, have been eaten by these individuals and, subsequently, they’ve dedicated one other offence of destroying proof.
None of those created any doubt within the thoughts of the trial court docket. They have been all “stray” incidents that might not divert the court docket’s single-minded focus from discovering the accused responsible. Not deadly to the prosecution, owing to cross-examination by an eminent lawyer, who’s now in jail on extra ridiculous trumped-up fees.
Non-cognisance of ill-treatment
This aside, the proof of the judicial Justice of the Peace first-class who recorded the alleged confession of Pandu (now deceased) and Vijay makes for an much more disheartening learn.
Pandu and Vijay had each addressed an in depth letter to the Justice of the Peace complaining concerning the ill-treatment that was meted out to them which was not acted upon in any respect, within the cross-examination when the judicial officer was countered with it he gave the next reply. Strive making sense of it.
“Not one of the accused had made an software earlier than me concerning the ill-treatment by police throughout the investigation. It’s true that the accused within the current case made a written software earlier than me about ill-treatment meted out to them after recording their assertion.
“I had not taken any motion on the idea of their written software. I didn’t name any report from the police officer. I didn’t take cognisance of their complaints.
Additionally learn: Bhima Koregaon: NIA court docket permits Varavara Rao to journey to Hyderabad to endure cataract surgical procedure in his left eye
“I didn’t take cognisance as a result of earlier than recording the confession when it was being recorded, I got here to know that mentioned the confession was voluntarily made and an software for ill-treatment was made subsequently therefore, I didn’t take any cognisance.
Briefly, a terrorist on a mission carrying extraordinarily delicate secret data that was to be given to the senior terrorists hiding within the forest was so naïve that he carried with him all his id paperwork.
“Now, I’m proven the grievance made by the accused within the current proceedings relating to ill-treatment. The grievance bears my signature about receipt of the identical. It’s marked at Exh 292. (doc exhibited as it’s referred by defence.)
“On the mentioned software on October 8, I known as say of APP (sic). Because the mentioned software was obtained by way of an envelope, I directed my workers of the court docket to file it with case papers and there was an endorsement to that impact on it.
“However the clerk of the court docket didn’t put it earlier than me. On October 8, I known as say of APP at the moment the mentioned software was not connected to the case papers. When the appliance was put earlier than me on the third and eighth, I had gone by way of your entire contents of the appliance.
“I had not taken any motion on the mentioned software. As the appliance was not once more put up earlier than me after acquiring say of APP, I didn’t cross any order. The mentioned software was not put up earlier than me after acquiring say of APP after my Order on October 8.
“I didn’t name the say of police. Because it was a grievance in opposition to the police, I didn’t name the say of APP. Not true to say that because the mentioned confession was recorded below the inducement and risk of police, I didn’t name the say of police.
“When there’s a grievance disclosing fee of cognisable offence, then the Justice of the Peace has to take cognisance of the offence. It’s not true to say that as a way to help the investigation, I didn’t take cognisance of the offence in respect of allegations made at Exh. 292.
Additionally learn: On Father Stan Swamy’s second dying anniversary, two letters, a portray and the triumph of reminiscence in opposition to forgetting
“Throughout my tenure at Aheri I used to reside within the quarter constructed by law enforcement officials. Witness volunteers that as there was no judicial assigned quarter and he had made an software to the then PDJ for assigning quarter and because the complete Gadchiroli district is a Naxalite space for safety functions, the quarter was assigned to me. Therefore I used to be residing there.”
Who will choose the (mis)choose?
Additionally, see the chronology of occasions. Hem Mishra is asserted arrested on August 22, 2013. Nationwide media carries the information. Prashant Rahi’s arrest is asserted arrested on September 2, 2013. Nationwide media carries the information.
The trial choose held, “[I]n order to determine the members of CPI Maoist or RDF organisation by an unknown particular person the distinctive identification, i.e., Banana, Umbrella and Newspaper have been used.”
Earlier than these two arrests, there was a report in a nationwide newspaper hinting that Saibaba was on the radar of safety businesses. In view of this report, colleagues of Saibaba addressed a letter to P. Chidambaram, the then Union House Minister, suspecting mischief by the hands of safety forces.
In these circumstances, is it plausible that an mental particular person of the calibre of Saibaba will hold all incriminating supplies in his personal home, in his laptop computer, in his laborious disc, in order that it turns into simpler for police to nab him and repair him for good?
An individual having the slightest of guilt on the smallest of hints will put himself on guard. He’ll watch his again. Erase all traces. Clear himself to the extent attainable. Make determined makes an attempt to destroy any and each proof. That may be pure conduct.
However there was nothing pure on this case.
Such being the case, the place arrest, search and seizure have been an important components, bereft of any proof, the court docket saying that solely life imprisonment is just not adequate, provides cause to say that the judicial officer was biased, if not motivated.
It was throughout this search once more that Prashant Rahi was discovered possessing Maoist literature. Which means that after about 24 hours since his custody, he continued to own the mentioned Maoist literature.
May it have been an error or ‘errors’, when data are overwhelmingly full with all causes to not consider the prosecution’s case? May it have been ignorance of legislation, when studying in proof what is just not introduced on data? May it have been an absence of judicial strategy? What may it’s?
Sadly nevertheless, the argument of Pradeep Mandhyan that the findings and judgment of the trial court docket are “perverse, dishonest and corrupt” stay undecided, and can stay undecided, eternally.
