News Analysis India

Tag: Bhima Koregaon case

  • Evidence planted to frame activists in Bhima Koregaon case, says Washington Post report

    By Express News Service
    NEW DELHI:  Incriminating evidence was planted on the activists involved in the Bhima Koregaon case, an investigation by a top American newspaper has revealed.

    According to the Washington Post, more than 30 documents that were part of the evidence listed by the prosecution was planted on the laptop of one of the accused activist as per a new forensic analysis by Arsenal Consulting, a Massachusetts-based digital forensics firm.

    This is the second independent forensic report in the same case that says the evidence cited by the investigating agencies was planted.

    As per the new report, 22 additional documents were delivered to the computer of the activist by the same attacker, which planted 10 documents as per the previous report.

    The documents, as per the company, were placed in a hidden folder on the computer.

    It includes details of purported meetings of Maoist militants, discussions on fund transfers, communications between purported Maoist leaders and concerns over state crackdown.

    According to the Post, the two reports by Arsenal focus on a laptop, which belongs to Rona Wilson, an activist.

    In February, lawyers for Wilson submitted the first report to a court in Mumbai, which is yet to decide on the plea.

    According to the report, Wilson’s computer was first compromised on June 13, 2016, when he was sent emails that appeared to be from fellow accused Varavara Rao, which suggested that he click on a link to download a document. 

    Wilson opened the document at 6.18 pm on the day, which led to the installation of the NetWire malware on his computer.

    The same attacker was found to have compromised Wilson’s computer multiple times from June 2016 to April 17, 2018, when Wilson’s and the homes of others accused were raided in connection with the case.

    The case pertains to the violent incidents which occurred on January 1, 2018 at Bhima Koregaon, near Pune during the Dalit organisations’ commemoration of 200th anniversary of the victory of Koregaon Battle. 

    The Pune police alleged that violence was incited by the Elgaar Parishad meeting held at Pune the previous day.

    It was alleged that the meeting was organised by persons having nexus with banned Maoist organisations.

  • Bhima Koregaon case: SC asks NIA to file reply on Gautam Navlakha’s bail plea by March 19

    By PTI
    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Monday asked NIA to file response by March 19 on the bail plea of activist Gautam Navlakha in the alleged Elgar Parishad-Maoist link case.

    A bench comprising justices U U Lalit and K M Joseph took note of the submission of Additional Solicitor General S V Raju that the National Investigation Agency (NIA) be granted time to file its response to Navlakha’s bail plea and fixed the case for hearing on March 22.

    The activist had moved the top court on February 19 against the Bombay High Court order of February 8 dismissing his bail plea.

    Navlakha has been seeking statutory bail under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) on the ground that the NIA did not file the charge sheet within the stipulated 90-day period making him entitled for grant of default bail.

    The high court, however, had held that the 34 days of Navlakha’s house arrest cannot be computed as the time spent in jail for granting him statutory bail.

    The high court had said that “it sees no reason to interfere with a special court’s order which earlier rejected his bail plea”.

    According to police, some activists allegedly made inflammatory speeches and provocative statements at the Elgar Parishad meet in Pune on December 31, 2017, which triggered violence at Koregaon Bhima in the district the next day.

    Police also alleged that the event was backed by some Maoist groups.

    The NIA is conducting a probe into the case.

    Navlakha had approached the high court last year, challenging the special NIA court’s order of July 12, 2020 that rejected his plea for statutory bail.

    On December 16 last year, the high court bench reserved its verdict on the plea filed by Navlakha, seeking statutory or default bail on grounds that he had been in custody for over 90 days, but the prosecution failed to file a charge sheet in the case within this period.

    The NIA had argued that his plea was not maintainable, and sought an extension to file the charge sheet.

    The special court had then accepted NIA’s plea seeking extension of 90 to 180 days to file the charge sheet against Navlakha and his co-accused, activist Anand Teltumbde.

    Navlakha’s counsel had told the high court that the NIA was granted the extension to file its charge sheet.

    Senior advocate Kapil Sibal had said Navlakha had already spent 93 days in custody, including 34 days of house arrest, and that the high court must count house arrest as a period of custody.

    While he was under house arrest, Navlakha’s personal liberties remained curtailed, Sibal had said.

    However, Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, who appeared for the NIA, had argued that Navlakha”s house arrest could not be included in the time spent in the custody of police or NIA, or under judicial custody.

    Raju argued that the Pune police arrested Navlakha in August 2018, but had not taken him into custody.

    He had said the accused remained under house arrest, and the Delhi High Court quashed his arrest and remand order in October 2018.

    The FIR against him was re-registered in January 2020, and Navlakha surrendered before the NIA on April 14.

    He spent 11 days in the NIA’s custody till April 25, and since then he has been in judicial custody in the Taloja jail in neighbouring Navi Mumbai.

    Raju had argued that if the court “looked from the other angle, it would see that if he (Navlakha) was arrested on August 28, 2018, he should have been enlarged on bail.

    ””He was a free man till April 2020. He was neither on bail nor in custody. There cannot be a gap in the custody and detention period,” Raju had said.

  • Bhima Koregaon case: SC to hear bail plea of activist Gautam Navlakha on March 3

    By PTI
    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear on Wednesday the bail plea of activist Gautam Navlakha in the alleged Elgar Parishad-Maoist link case.

    The activist, on February 19, had moved the top court against the Bombay High Court order of February 8 dismissing his bail plea.

    The high court had said that “it sees no reason to interfere with a special court’s order which earlier rejected his bail plea”.

    A three judge bench of the apex court comprising justices U U Lalit, Indira Banerjee and K M Joseph would take up the appeal of Navlakha for hearing on March 3 against the high court’s order.

    According to police, some activists allegedly made inflammatory speeches and provocative statements at the Elgar Parishad meet in Pune on December 31, 2017, which triggered violence at Koregaon Bhima in the district the next day.

    Police also alleged that the event was backed by some Maoist groups.

    The National Investigation Agency (NIA) is conducting a probe into the case.

    Navlakha had approached the high court last year, challenging the special NIA court’s order of July 12, 2020 that rejected his plea for statutory bail.

    On December 16 last year, the high court bench reserved its verdict on the plea filed by Navlakha, seeking statutory or default bail on grounds that he had been in custody for over 90 days, but the prosecution failed to file a charge sheet in the case within this period.

    The NIA had argued that his plea was not maintainable, and sought an extension to file the charge sheet.

    The special court had then accepted NIA’s plea seeking extension of 90 to 180 days to file the charge sheet against Navlakha and his co-accused, activist Dr Anand Teltumbde.

    Navlakha’s counsel had told the high court that the NIA was granted the extension to file its charge sheet.

    Senior advocate Kapil Sibal had said Navlakha had already spent 93 days in custody, including 34 days of house arrest, and that the high court must count house arrest as a period of custody.

    While he was under house arrest, Navlakha’s personal liberties remained curtailed, Sibal had said.

    However, Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, who appeared for the NIA, had argued that Navlakha’s house arrest could not be included in the time spent in the custody of police or NIA, or under judicial custody.

    Raju argued that the Pune police arrested Navlakha in August 2018, but had not taken him into custody.

    He said the accused remained under house arrest, and the Delhi High Court quashed his arrest and remand order in October 2018.

    The FIR against him was re-registered in January 2020, and Navlakha surrendered before the NIA on April 14.

    He spent 11 days in the NIA’s custody till April 25, and since then he in judicial custody in the Taloja jail in neighbouring Navi Mumbai.

    Raju had argued that if the court “looked from the other angle, it would see that if he (Navlakha) was arrested on August 28, 2018, he should have been enlarged on bail.”

    “He was a free man till April 2020. He was neither on bail nor in custody. There cannot be a gap in the custody and detention period,” Raju had said.

  • Court refuses to pass order on jailed activists Hany Babu, Gautam Navlakha’s plea for books

    By PTI
    MUMBAI: A special NIA court has refused to pass any order on the plea of jailed activists Hany Babu and Gautam Navlakha, both accused in the Elghar-Parishad Maoist links case, seeking books from outside the prison.

    Special NIA judge D E Kothalikar recently noted that it would not be just to pass any order as it would be within the province of the jail authority to accept articles for the undertrial prisoners.

    Navlakha and Hany Babu are lodged in Taloja jail in Navi Mumbai in connection with the case.

    Last month, their lawyer had claimed that the prison authorities refused to accept the books sent for the activists and was asked to get an order from the court.

    They then moved a plea seeking access to books and magazines from outside the prison.

    The court noted that a statement had been made before it by the advocate that she had approached the superintendent for providing books to the applicant, but was asked to bring an order from the court.

    On perusal of the contents of the present affidavits, it appears that the applicants have taken a somersault and come with the contention that the books were sent to the prison (via courier) and they were refused to be accepted, the court said.

    “It is worthy to be noted here that the prison authority is supposed to take care about the security of the prison…,” it added.

    As per the record, the parcels were returned with an endorsement ‘Covid Suraksha’.

    “In this view of the matter, unless an attempt is made to hand over the books physically to the jail authority and the same is refused to be accepted by it, in my view it would not be just to pass any order as it would be within the province of the jail authority to accept articles for the under trial prisoners, if attempted to be delivered by their relatives or near ones,” it said.

    “Hence, I do not find it fit to pass order on the applications,” the court added.

    Earlier, the court had allowed similar plea of another activist Sudha Bharadwaj.

    The court had directed the jail superintendent to allow Bharadwaj have access to five books a month from outside the prison in central Mumbai.

    Navlakha and Babu, along with other activists, were initially booked by the Pune police after violence erupted near Koregaon Bhima near Pune, a day after an Elgar Parishad conclave was organised.

    Inflammatory speeches and provocative statements made at the Elgar Parishad meet held in Pune city on December 31, 2017, triggered the violence at Koregaon-Bhima the next day, the police had alleged.

    According to the police, the event was “backed” by Maoists.

    The NIA later took over the probe into the case.