[Bhima Koregaon] Why NIA has opposed house arrest plea of Gautam Navlakha in Bombay High Court

The plea filed by Bhima Koregaon accused Gautam Navlakha praying that he be transferred from prison and placed under house arrest instead, is a waste of judicial time, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) has told the Bombay High Court.

. An academician, writer, human rights activist and former secretary of People's Union for Democratic Rights, Navlakha was arrested in August 2018, but was initially placed under house arrest. He was later moved to Taloja Central Prison in Maharashtra in April 2020 after a Supreme Court order.

Relying upon the Supreme Court judgment in his default bail case, Navlakha moved the High Court pointing out that he was being denied basic medical and other necessities in Taloja prison and was suffering great hardships at his advanced age.

. In its 22-page affidavit, NIA has now filed a 22-page affidavit seeking dismissal of Navlakha's plea.

. Navlakha had highlighted in his petition that he had been under house arrest for 35 days before being protected from arrest by the Supreme Court thereafter for over 1 year and 7 months without any prejudice having been caused to the investigation agencies.

. NIA responded stating that it would be incorrect to say that Navlakha satisfied the criteria for house arrest.

It was NIA's case that Navlakha was involved in nefarious activities of Communist Party of India (Maoist) and was charged under Sections 120B, 115, 121, 121A, 124A, 505(1)(b) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 13, 16, 18, 20, 38 and 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. His arrest was based on clinching evidence against him, it was claimed.

. NIA stated that the Supreme Court had permitted house arrest only during the period when there was adjudication on the alleged illegal case made out against him.

This observation manifested in the fact that the highest court was of the opinion that there is prima facie case against Navlakha and directed him to surrender before the NIA in April 2020 and also directed him to submit his passport.

It was never Supreme Court's observation that Navlakha was not likely to abscond, NIA stated in its affidavit.

"Had Supreme Court considered that Navlakha is not likely to abscond it would not have directed him to surrender in the first place ," NIA reasoned.

NIA also added that there was every possibility that Navlakha will tamper with evidence or threaten witnesses in the case if released from jail.

. Navlakha approached the High Court after he discovered a lump in his chest. Considering there was a history of cancer in Navlakha's family, he had an apprehension that the lump may be malignant and in order to examine the same, Navlakha moved the High Court for urgent relief.

. NIA in its affidavit pointed out that Navlakha's bail pleas on medical and COVID grounds had earlier been rejected by the Special NIA Court after hearing both sides and after due verification of record.

The agency argued that Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure could be invoked only in exceptional circumstances and the present case did not warrant the same.

Even if it is assumed that the petitioner suffers from any medical condition, he can be taken for treatment to JJ hospital or any government hospital depending on opinion given by doctor in Taloja hospital.

But that did not entitle Navlakha to be placed under house arrest, the NIA submitted.

. As far as issues pertaining to the deplorable conditions in prisons are concerned, the prison authorities would be in better position to deal with the same, the NIA said.

[Bhima Koregaon] Why NIA has opposed house arrest plea of Gautam Navlakha in Bombay High Court

Neha Joshi

Related Stories