‘Mini Trial Held, Special Court Went Into Question Of Possibility Of Conviction’: Gauhati High Court Sets Aside Order Discharging Akhil Gogoi In UAPA Case

The Gauhati High Court on Thursday set aside a trial court order discharging Assam MLA Akhil Gogoi in a UAPA case registered against him and others in 2019 by National Investigation Agency (NIA) in connection with the protests against Citizenship Amendment Bill. 

The division bench of Justice Suman Shyam and Justice Malasri Nandi last month had reserved its decision on the appeal moved by NIA against the Special Court's July 1, 2021 order to discharge Gogoi in the case which accuses him and others of conspiring to to incite hatred and disaffection towards the government, using the passage of the Citizenship Amendment Bill as a pretext and promoting enmity amongst different groups of people.

"We have allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and laid some guidelines. The reasons why we have set aside, we have mentioned. This was a mini trial held and the court went into question of possibility of conviction rather than grounds to proceed," Justice Shyam said, while pronouncing the judgment.

The court also said there was a violation of principles of natural justice on certain points. "The prosecution was entitled to an opportunity," it added.

The bench clarified that those accused, who were on bail previously, will remain on bail. It also said that there will be a day-to-day hearing in the case.

When the court was informed that Gogoi was not on bail, the bench said it has noted that if he moves the bail application, it will considered on its merits and without being influenced by anything.

"The direction is to appear on 23rd of February," it added.

During the pronouncement, the court also said, "But the exercise needs to be done again. Of course in these matters, it is very difficult to lay down very strict parameters. But we had a feeling that the order has a trappings of an order of acquittal rather than order framing charge. Could be debatable issue. It can be tested differently."

The NIA had earlier invoked provisions of UAPA and Section 120(B)/124A/153A/153B IPC against the accused.

Special NIA Judge Pranjal Das, while discharging the accused, had said that "... from his speeches available on record, Sri Akhil Gogoi (A-1) cannot be imputed with any incitement to violence. There are also no materials to link A-1 with vandalism and damage to property that took place during the said CAA protest due to such agitations led by various organizations."

The Special Court had also observed that protests in a democracy are sometimes seen to take the form of blockades also, even causing inconvenience to citizens. "However, it is doubtful whether such blockades for temporary periods, if unaccompanied by any incitement to violence, would constitute a terrorist act within the meaning of Section 15 of the UA (P) Act. That in my mind, is beyond the intention of the legislature. There can be other laws to address that," NIA Judge Das had said in the order.

Case Title: The State, National Investigation Agency v. Akhil Gogoi and 3 Ors.

Citation:2023 LiveLaw (Gau) 20

Coram: Justice Suman Shyam and Justice Malasari Nandi

Also Read: Gauhati High Court Directs Trial Court To Conduct Fresh Hearing On Framing Of Charges In UAPA Case Against Akhil Gogoi, Others