shot-button
Lake Levels Lake Levels
Home > Mumbai > Mumbai News > Article > SC rejects NIA petition opposing default bail to Sudha Bharadwaj

SC rejects NIA petition opposing default bail to Sudha Bharadwaj

Updated on: 08 December,2021 08:32 AM IST  |  Mumbai
Agencies |

Top court says it finds no reason to interfere with the Bombay High order that granted relief to the lawyer-activist in Elgar Parishad case

SC rejects NIA petition opposing default bail to Sudha Bharadwaj

Sudha Bharadwaj

The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed the National Investigation Agency’s appeal challenging the Bombay High Court order granting default bail to lawyer-activist Sudha Bharadwaj in the Elgar Parishad-Maoist links case. This will pave the way for her release.


“We see no reason to interfere with the high court order. Dismissed,” said a bench of Justices U U lalit, S Ravindra Bhat and Bela M Trivedi, refusing to consider the submissions raised by the NIA which had moved the apex court against the December 1 order. Bharadwaj was arrested in the Elgar Parishad-Maoist links case in August 2018 under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.


The activist lawyer, accused of hatching conspiracy to overthrow the Union government, was entitled to bail and its denial would be in breach of her fundamental right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, the high court had said. It had directed that Bharadwaj, lodged in the Byculla women’s prison, be produced before the Mumbai special NIA court on December 8, and conditions of her bail and date of release be decided.


The high court had held that the additional sessions judge of Pune, which had extended the time period beyond 90 days for filing the charge sheet to the NIA, was not competent to do so as it was not notified as a Special Court under a provision of the NIA Act.

Under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), if an investigating agency does not file the charge sheet within 90 days, the accused becomes entitled for grant of statutory bail by default. “So the moot question is whether the court was competent. If the competence was lacking there was no valid extension of period and the lady was entitled to statutory bail,” the bench said.

This story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed, agencies. Mid-day accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability, trustworthiness, reliability and data of the text. Mid-day management/mid-day.com reserves the sole right to alter, delete or remove (without notice) the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever

"Exciting news! Mid-day is now on WhatsApp Channels Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!

Register for FREE
to continue reading !

This is not a paywall.
However, your registration helps us understand your preferences better and enables us to provide insightful and credible journalism for all our readers.

Mid-Day Web Stories

Mid-Day Web Stories

This website uses cookie or similar technologies, to enhance your browsing experience and provide personalised recommendations. By continuing to use our website, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Cookie Policy. OK