The Bombay High Court Nagpur bench in the case observed and has set aside the conviction of former Delhi University Professor GN Saibaba and five others in an alleged Maoist-links case under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, UAPA.
The Division bench comprising of Justice Vinay Joshi and Justice Valmiki SA Menezes pronounced the judgment.
In the present case, Wheelchair-bound GN Saibaba and his co-accused have been under custody since their arrest in 2014 on charges of having links with Maoist organizations and waging war against India.
It has been contended by the prosecution during the trial at the Sessions Court in Gadchiroli that the accused were working for the banned CPI (Maoist) group through front organizations such as RDF.
The prosecution in the case relied on evidence which includes seized pamphlets and electronic material deemed as anti-national, allegedly seized at the behest of GN Saibaba in Gadchiroli.
Further, it was alleged that Saibaba handed over a 16GB memory card intended for Naxalites sheltering in the Abuzmad forest area.
Therefore, the said trial led to their conviction in March 2017 under section 13, section 18, section 20, section 38 and section 39 of the UAPA and section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
The Another bench of Bombay High Court in the acse observed and has set aside the conviction based on procedural grounds, with the bench of Justice Rohit Deo and Justice Anil Pansare holding the trial void due to the absence of a valid sanction under section 45(1) of the UAPA.
The said court had underscored the importance of procedural compliance in cases involving terrorism and emphasized that departures from due process could foster an environment conducive to terrorism.
The Supreme Court in the special Saturday sitting, which attracted controversy observed and has stayed the order of High Court, the very next day after an urgent mentioning by the Maharashtra Government.
The Supreme Court overturned this decision in the petition filed by the Maharashtra government challenging the acquittal and directed the Bombay High Court to reevaluate the case afresh.
The Supreme Court in the case observed and has directed that the Bombay High Court must consider all aspects of the case, including the question of sanction.
Therefore, the said bench stressed that the high court should proceed without prejudice and solely on the merits of the case, without being influenced by its earlier order.
The court stated that it would be open for the State to contend that once an accused is convicted after the conclusion of a trial, the validity of the sanction or he lack thereof would become insignificant.
The Supreme Court in the case also instructed that the case be assigned to a different bench to maintain propriety and avoid any apprehensions.
The Supreme Court while considering the facts and circumstances also clarified that it had not made any determination on the merits of the case and emphasized the need for a thorough review by the high court.