The Maharashtra government has moved the Supreme Court against the decision of the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court, which was pronounced this morning, acquitting former Delhi University professor GN Saibaba in an alleged Maoist links case. .The appeal was mentioned before a bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and Hima Kohli by the Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta seeking urgent listing of the case."Person who's from CPI Maoist acquitted by Bombay High Court, order uploaded today. Limited prayer is that if your lordships can hear the matter on Monday", he submitted. .While the bench said that it could not stay the order acquitting Saibaba, it directed for the case to be listed before an appropriate bench after the Chief Justice of India (CJI) provided his administrative approval..The court also specified that the State government could move an application seeking an earlier hearing tomorrow..A bench comprising Justices Rohit Deo and Anil Pansare on Friday allowed an appeal filed by Saibaba challenging a 2017 decision of the trial court convicting and sentencing him to life imprisonment based on the fact that the Sessions Court framed charges against Saibaba in the absence of sanction from the Central government under Section 45(1) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act..The division bench recorded that while terrorism poses an ominous threat to national security and every legitimate weapon in the armoury must be deployed against it, a civil democracy cannot sacrifice procedural safeguards afforded to the accused.“We are inclined to hold, that every safeguard, however miniscule, legislatively provided to the accused, must be zealously protected,” the judgment said.Nonetheless, the Court took note of the request of the prosecution urging that if the appeal was not decided on merits, and only on the point of sanction, they may be given the liberty to obtain proper sanction and try the accused.“In view of the well-entrenched position of law, that the rule against double jeopardy has no application if the trial is held vitiated due to invalidity or absence of sanction, we see no reason to dilate any further on the said submission,” the bench said.