Supreme Court Dismisses Abdul Nazar Maudany's Plea To Reduce Security Expenses Claimed By Karnataka Police For His Stay In Kerala
The Supreme Court on Monday rejected the plea of 2008 Bangalore blasts case accused Abdul Nasser Maudani challenging Karnataka government's demand that he should deposit over Rs 56 lakhs to provide security cover to him during his stay in Kerala for a period of nearly three months.A Bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Bela Trivedi said that it saw no reason to interfere with the decision taken...
The Supreme Court on Monday rejected the plea of 2008 Bangalore blasts case accused Abdul Nasser Maudani challenging Karnataka government's demand that he should deposit over Rs 56 lakhs to provide security cover to him during his stay in Kerala for a period of nearly three months.
A Bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Bela Trivedi said that it saw no reason to interfere with the decision taken by the State Police regarding the number of personnel to be deployed for Maudani's security cover.
Relaxing the bail condition that he should remain in Bengaluru till the end of the trial, the Court had on April 20 allowed him to stay in Kerala till July 8 to visit his ailing father and to take care of his own medical treatment. But, the bench imposed a condition that he should undertake the expenses for the security cover.
Earlier, the Karnataka government sought Rs 20.23 lakh per month for 20 police persons to accompany him. The figure was arrived at, after a police team led by Bengaluru City Police Commissioner Yathish Chandra visited Kerala and submitted a report considering security threats and other aspects.
Maudani pleaded difficulty in meeting the expenses.
During the hearing, the Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, for the petitioner, argued that told when he was allowed to visit Kerala earlier, the security expenses claimed was just Rs 1.18 lakh and that Rs 20 lakh per month is a significant sum for him.
The Bench then asked the counsel for the state government, "He hasn't created any problem now. Why are you creating a problem for him?"
Advocate Nikhil Goel, the Additional Advocate General of Karnataka, submitted that as per the itinerary submitted by Maudani, his visit is not confined to his father's residence; instead he has plans to visit multiple places in Kerala. He highlighted that Maudani was facing allegations of carrying out anti-India activities "This is why we need to carry out a threat assessment", he added.
"Just asking. How many security people does he have in Bangalore for me? Only one", Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal pointed out.
"When you go outside the State, it is different", the Bench said. Though Sibal requested that the Kerala Police be asked to take care of the security, the bench refused by saying that the Bengaluru police will take care of all the security aspects.
"I'm the Chairman of a political party. I want to go to my father's house, to the hospital and to my own house. That's all. Only three places", Sibal submitted when the other side claimed that Maudani wanted to visit 10 places.
Even after the order was passed, Sibal continued :
"Please appreciate. He's been on bail for 8 years. Nothing has happened. Why would I be of risk to anybody? He is on a wheel chair! Milords, 55 lakhs, how can anybody afford? Matter is on trial; I am not convicted. Might as well say that we have no liberty, that's what it means!"
The PDP leader, along with 31 others, was booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 for his alleged involvement in a series of bomb blasts on July 25, 2008, in Bengaluru that left one person dead and 20 injured.
Case Title: Abdul Maudany Vs State of Karnataka