Elgar Parishad Case: Bombay Prime Court docket Rejects Gautam Navlakha’s Bail Plea
The Nationwide Investigation Company (NIA) is carrying out a probe into the case (Document)
Mumbai:
The Bombay Prime Court docket on Monday brushed aside a statutory bail attraction of activist Gautam Navlakha, an accused within the Elgar Parishad-Maoist hyperlinks case, announcing it sees no reason why to intrude with a unique court docket’s “well-reasoned order” which previous refused him bail.
A bench of Justices SS Shinde and MS Karnik stated the 34 days that Navlakha spent underneath space arrest in 2018 may just no longer be counted because the length spent in custody for attention of the statutory bail.
The civil rights activist was once arrested by means of the Pune police on August 28, 2018, however no longer taken in custody.
Between August 28 and October 1, 2018, Mr Navlakha was once saved underneath space arrest.
He additionally spent 11 days within the NIA’s custody from April 14 to April 25 remaining 12 months, after he surrendered following re-registration of an FIR towards him in January 2020.
Since then, he has remained in judicial custody and is lodged on the Taloja prison in neighbouring Navi Mumbai.
The Nationwide Investigation Company (NIA) is carrying out a probe into the case.
Mr Navlakha approached the Prime Court docket remaining 12 months, difficult the particular NIA court docket’s order of July 12, 2020 that confounded his plea for statutory bail.
He had sought statutory or default bail at the flooring that he have been in custody for over 90 days, however the prosecution didn’t record a price sheet within the case inside this era.
His recommend, senior suggest Kapil Sibal, had argued that Mr Navlakha already spent 93 days in custody, together with 34 days of space arrest between August 28 and October 1, 2018, and the prime court docket will have to rely space arrest because the length of custody.
Further Solicitor Normal SV Raju, showing for the NIA, had antagonistic the applying, contending the particular court docket had rightfully held that Mr Navlakha’s space arrest didn’t represent detention.
He had stated that right through such space arrest, Mr Navlakha was once no longer out there for interrogation as he would had been if in common custody.
