Supreme Court Refuses To Stay Acquittal Of GN Saibaba & 5 Others, Says HC Judgment Prima Facie Well Reasoned

The Supreme Court on Monday (March 11) refused to stay the judgment of the Bombay High Court, which acquitted Professor GN Saibaba and five others in a case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 over alleged Maoist links.

A bench of Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, while hearing the special leave petition filed by the State of Maharashtra, made a prima facie observation that the judgment of the high court is "very well reasoned".

The bench pointed out that GN Saibaba and others were acquitted twice by two different benches of the high court. It may be recalled that in 2022, the Bombay High Court had acquitted them on the ground that valid sanction under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act had not been obtained. Last year, the Supreme Court overturned this verdict and remitted the matter back to the high court for fresh consideration by a different bench. Last week, another bench of the Bombay High Court acquitted them on merits as well, finding that there was no evidence to link the accused to any terrorist act and casting doubts on the seizures which the state police claimed to have made from them.

The bench told Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing for the State of Maharashtra, that the presumption of innocence operates with more force once there is an acquittal. The bench said that in the ordinary course, the special leave petition would not have been admitted even since there are very limited grounds for interfering with an acquittal order. Justice Gavai told the law officer -

"There are two orders of acquittal by two different benches. Prima facie, we find that the judgment is very well-reasoned. Since on an earlier occasion, this court had interfered, we'll have to honour that. Otherwise, this is a very well-reasoned judgment by the high court. In ordinary course, we would not have entertained this appeal. The parameters of interference with acquittal orders are very limited."

"It's a hard-earned acquittal. How many years has the man spent in jail?," Justice Mehta added.

"The law is that there is a presumption of innocence. Once there's an order of acquittal, that presumption gets fortified," Justice Gavai stated.

When the matter was taken, the additional solicitor general requested another date, stating that certain additional documents needed to be produced. The bench said that it can grant leave to appeal. However, it refused ASG Raju's request for an early date, saying "You apply for expedition. There can be no urgency to reverse an order of acquittal."

Although the law officer did not raise any arguments for stay of the judgment, the bench, after noting that the appeal memo had an application for stay, proceeded to dismiss it.

"Through ASG SV Raju did not press for stay, since there is a prayer in the appeal memo, we are inclined to reject the same," the bench recorded in the order. The bench also granted leave to appeal to the State of Maharashtra.

Background

Former Delhi University professor GN Saibaba and other co-accused were arrested in 2014 on charges related to alleged links with proscribed far-left organisations and waging war against India. During the trial in a Maharashtra sessions court, the prosecution presented evidence claiming that they were working for the banned CPI (Maoist) group through front organisations such as RDF. The prosecution relied on seized pamphlets and electronic material, deemed 'anti-national', allegedly found in possession of GN Saibaba in Gadchiroli. It was also alleged that Saibaba had handed over a 16GB memory card intended for Naxalites in the Abuzmad forest area.

Following this, GN Saibaba, Mahesh Tirki, Hem Keshwdatta Mishra, Prashant Rahi, Vijay Nan Tirki, and Pandu Pora Narote were convicted in March 2017 under Sections 13, 18, 20, 38, and 39 of the UAPA, along with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. Narote died in prison August 2022 during the pendency of their appeal against this order of conviction. 

Last week, a bench of Justices Vinay Joshi and Valmiki SA Menezes acquitted GN Saibaba and the other co-accused. While handing down this verdict, the high court observed that their trial was held despite violation of mandatory provisions of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act pertaining to arrest, search and seizure, and sanction to prosecute, and as such, amounted to a failure of justice.

The court also observed, "No evidence has been led by the prosecution by any witness to any incident, attack, act of violence or even evidence collected from some earlier scene of offence where a terrorist act has taken place, in order to connect the accused to such act, either by participating in its preparation or its direction or in any manner providing support to its commission."

Notably, the division bench also observed that merely downloading Communist or Naxal literature from the internet or being a sympathiser of the philosophy is not an offence under the anti-terror statute, insisting that in addition to such literature, evidence was required to connect the accused to specific incidents of violence and terrorism, which would be offences within the purview of Sections 13, 20 and 39 of the UAPA.

Later in that same day, this bench also dismissed an application filed by the State of Maharashtra praying for the judgment to be suspended for six weeks.

Case Details

State of Maharashtra v. Mahesh Kariman Tirki & Ors. | Diary No. 10501 of 2024

Click Here To Read/Download Order