Tag: Elgar Parishad-Maoist case

  • Treatment, straw, books… things Bhima Koregaon accused have asked courts for

    By PTI

    MUMBAI: The Supreme Court order permitting jailed activist Gautam Navlakha to be kept under house arrest for a month has brought to the fore several applications filed by the accused in the Elgar Parishad-Maoist links case lamenting lack of facilities in jail and denial of access to the same.

    Besides seeking medical treatment, the accused in the case have time and again approached courts for permission to get books, chairs, drinking straws, spectacles and mosquito nets inside the prison have asked courts for.

    In November 2020, accused Stan Swamy had filed an application before a special court here seeking straw and sipper at the Taloja jail in Navi Mumbai where he is lodged.

    In his plea, Swamy had said the National Investigation Agency (NIA) seized it from him and he was unable to lift a glass due to Parkinson’s disease.

    The NIA, in its reply, however, said it had not seized any straw and sipper glass from Swamy.

    Later, jail authorities provided him with a straw and sipper.

    Swamy died in July 2021 at a private hospital here while he was in judicial custody.

    In December 2020, Navlakha’s partner Sahba Husain said the former’s spectacles were stolen in jail and when his family sent him a new pair, the jail authorities refused to accept them.

    The high court had later criticised the jail authorities and said all these are human considerations.

    The jail authorities later accepted the pair of spectacles sent by Navlakha’s family.

    READ HERE | Relief for Bhima Koregaon accused Gautam Navlakha as SC paves way for house arrest

    In 2020, lawyer-activist Sudha Bharadwaj had filed an application before the special court claiming she was not being allowed access to books.

    She said when books were sent for her, the Superintendent at Mumbai’s Byculla Jail, where she was lodged, had refused to receive them for her.

    The special court had allowed her plea to have access to five books per month from outside prison, while directing the jail superintendent to “carefully examine” the books to ensure they did not contain any “objectionable material”.

    The court had also said beyond the prescribed parameters to deem a book’s content “objectionable”, including whether it is vulgar, obscene or preaches violence, a superintendent did not have powers to withhold a book from a detainee.

    In April this year, Navlakha’s lawyer Yug Chaudhary had informed the Bombay High Court that prison authorities had refused to hand over a book by English author P G Wodehouse.

    During the arguments in the high court on Navlakha’s plea seeking to be kept under house arrest, Chaudhary had said the condition of the prison was very poor.

    The HC had then said the prison authorities’ action refusing Wodehouse’s book was comical.

    Navlakha and co-accused Sagar Gorkhe had filed applications in the special court seeking permission to have mosquito nets inside the prison.

    This was opposed by Taloja jail authorities citing security concerns.

    ALSO READ | Bhima Koregaon case: Pune cop planted evidence in devices of jailed activists, says report

    The court did not allow the pleas of Navlakha and Gorkhe, but directed the jail superintendent to take “all necessary precautions against mosquitoes, conduct fumigation, allow inmates to use repellents, ointments and incense sticks”.

    Navlakha had also filed another application in the special court seeking permission to make phone/video calls to his kin.

    The prison authorities had contended that the facility started during the COVID-19 pandemic, but could not be permitted to undertrials on a regular basis.

    The court rejected Navlakha’s plea, following which he filed an appeal in the high court.

    Surendra Gadling, another accused in the case, had filed an application seeking a chair and table citing medical ailments, claiming he was unable to squat on the floor for long without developing pain in his back and neck.

    ALSO READ | SC grants bail to Bhima Koregaon case accused Varavara Rao on medical grounds

    Gadling had said he needed the table and chair as he had to study a lot since he was representing himself in the case.

    Prison authorities had opposed this plea as well citing security risks.

    The court agreed with Gadling’s contention, observing that the allegations he has to defend himself against are serious and there are a large number of documents he needs to study for hours together.

    Gadling was allowed a chair and table at his cost.

    Gadling had also sought permission to have his own shaving kit, which was opposed by the prison authorities.

    The court agreed with the prison authorities that it would pose danger and rejected the application.

    MUMBAI: The Supreme Court order permitting jailed activist Gautam Navlakha to be kept under house arrest for a month has brought to the fore several applications filed by the accused in the Elgar Parishad-Maoist links case lamenting lack of facilities in jail and denial of access to the same.

    Besides seeking medical treatment, the accused in the case have time and again approached courts for permission to get books, chairs, drinking straws, spectacles and mosquito nets inside the prison have asked courts for.

    In November 2020, accused Stan Swamy had filed an application before a special court here seeking straw and sipper at the Taloja jail in Navi Mumbai where he is lodged.

    In his plea, Swamy had said the National Investigation Agency (NIA) seized it from him and he was unable to lift a glass due to Parkinson’s disease.

    The NIA, in its reply, however, said it had not seized any straw and sipper glass from Swamy.

    Later, jail authorities provided him with a straw and sipper.

    Swamy died in July 2021 at a private hospital here while he was in judicial custody.

    In December 2020, Navlakha’s partner Sahba Husain said the former’s spectacles were stolen in jail and when his family sent him a new pair, the jail authorities refused to accept them.

    The high court had later criticised the jail authorities and said all these are human considerations.

    The jail authorities later accepted the pair of spectacles sent by Navlakha’s family.

    READ HERE | Relief for Bhima Koregaon accused Gautam Navlakha as SC paves way for house arrest

    In 2020, lawyer-activist Sudha Bharadwaj had filed an application before the special court claiming she was not being allowed access to books.

    She said when books were sent for her, the Superintendent at Mumbai’s Byculla Jail, where she was lodged, had refused to receive them for her.

    The special court had allowed her plea to have access to five books per month from outside prison, while directing the jail superintendent to “carefully examine” the books to ensure they did not contain any “objectionable material”.

    The court had also said beyond the prescribed parameters to deem a book’s content “objectionable”, including whether it is vulgar, obscene or preaches violence, a superintendent did not have powers to withhold a book from a detainee.

    In April this year, Navlakha’s lawyer Yug Chaudhary had informed the Bombay High Court that prison authorities had refused to hand over a book by English author P G Wodehouse.

    During the arguments in the high court on Navlakha’s plea seeking to be kept under house arrest, Chaudhary had said the condition of the prison was very poor.

    The HC had then said the prison authorities’ action refusing Wodehouse’s book was comical.

    Navlakha and co-accused Sagar Gorkhe had filed applications in the special court seeking permission to have mosquito nets inside the prison.

    This was opposed by Taloja jail authorities citing security concerns.

    ALSO READ | Bhima Koregaon case: Pune cop planted evidence in devices of jailed activists, says report

    The court did not allow the pleas of Navlakha and Gorkhe, but directed the jail superintendent to take “all necessary precautions against mosquitoes, conduct fumigation, allow inmates to use repellents, ointments and incense sticks”.

    Navlakha had also filed another application in the special court seeking permission to make phone/video calls to his kin.

    The prison authorities had contended that the facility started during the COVID-19 pandemic, but could not be permitted to undertrials on a regular basis.

    The court rejected Navlakha’s plea, following which he filed an appeal in the high court.

    Surendra Gadling, another accused in the case, had filed an application seeking a chair and table citing medical ailments, claiming he was unable to squat on the floor for long without developing pain in his back and neck.

    ALSO READ | SC grants bail to Bhima Koregaon case accused Varavara Rao on medical grounds

    Gadling had said he needed the table and chair as he had to study a lot since he was representing himself in the case.

    Prison authorities had opposed this plea as well citing security risks.

    The court agreed with Gadling’s contention, observing that the allegations he has to defend himself against are serious and there are a large number of documents he needs to study for hours together.

    Gadling was allowed a chair and table at his cost.

    Gadling had also sought permission to have his own shaving kit, which was opposed by the prison authorities.

    The court agreed with the prison authorities that it would pose danger and rejected the application.

  • Maharashtra govt to HC: US firm has no ‘locus standi’ to give opinion in Elgar Parishad case

    By PTI
    MUMBAI: The Maharashtra government has told the Bombay High Court US digital forensics firm Arsenal Consulting, that claimed evidence had been ‘planted’ on electronic devices of some accused persons in the Elgar Parishad-Maoist links case, had no “locus standi” to give its opinion without a court order.

    The Maharashtra government made the submission in an affidavit filed in the HC on July 1 which was taken on record on Tuesday.

    The affidavit was filed opposing a writ petition of activist Rona Wilson, one of the accused persons, seeking that the FIR and the chargesheet against him in the case be quashed.

    Wilson is one of the accused persons, on whose computer, an incriminating letter was “planted”, as per an Arsenal report released earlier this year.

    In its affidavit, the state government has said that while conducting raids at the homes of Wilson and other accused in 2018, the Pune police, the then prosecuting agency in the case (which was later handed over to the NIA), had followed due process.

    ALSO READ | Elgar Parishad case transferred to NIA as it pertains to national security: Probe agency to Bombay HC

    The state government said that Wilson had not been singled out or targeted by the police.

    It further said Wilson had claimed in his plea that someone had hacked into his computer and planted incriminating material.

    It was, therefore, for Wilson to show the court who was behind the alleged act of tampering with evidence, the affidavit said.

    “The contentions raised in the petition (of Wilson) are all based on the report of Arsenal Consulting. This report does not form part of the chargesheets filed by the NIA or the present respondent (Pune police),” the state said in the affidavit.

    It further said since the Arsenal report was not part of the chargesheets, it could not be relied upon by the HC.

    “When trial is pending and the matter is sub-judice, Arsenal has no locus standi (right or ability to bring legal action to a court) to give such opinion without permission of the honourable court,” the affidavit said.

    The state government urged the HC to dismiss Wilson’s plea, saying it was based entirely on “disputed questions of fact.”

    Wilson and his co-accused, professor Shoma Sen, filed two pleas earlier this year through senior counsels Indira Jaising and Anand Grover, citing the Arsenal report and seeking that the charges against them be quashed.

    Their pleas were listed for hearing in the HC on Monday but was adjourned to July 26 by a bench of Justices SS Shinde and NJ Jamadar since the petitioners’ lawyers were yet to submit copies of the compilations and judgements they wished the court to go through.

    Earlier this year, the NIA had filed two similar affidavits opposing the pleas filed by Wilson and Sen.

    The Maharashtra government is yet to file its reply to Sen’s plea.

    Over a dozen activists and academicians have been named as accused in the case that relates to the Elgar Parishad conclave organised in Pune on December 31, 2017.