UAPA case: Supreme Court seeks NIA response on appeal by Akhil Gogoi against Gauhati High Court order setting aside his discharge

The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought the response of the National Investigation Agency (NIA) on an appeal filed by Assamese activist and Sibsagar MLA Akhil Gogoi against a Gauhati High Court order setting aside his discharge in a case involving offences under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) [Akhil Gogoi vs the State (National Investigation Agency) and ors]. .A bench of Justices V Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal said that it will hear the matter on Friday and ordered that Gogoi should not be taken into custody until then, in connection with the criminal complaint in the matter."Let notice be served on the standing counsel for the State (NIA), for the limited purpose of considering the grant of protection to the petitioner from arrest pursuant to the impugned order, returnable on 24.02.2023. In the meantime, the petitioner shall be protected against arrest", the Court said..Gogoi and three others were booked for the offences in relation to December 2019 protests and speeches against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and alleged links to Maoist organisations.They were charged under various provisions of Unlawful Prevention Activities Act (UAPA) and for Sedition (section 124A), promoting enmity between religious groups (section 153A) and 153B (Statement against national integration) under the Indian Penal Code.The special NIA court in Guwahati had in July 2021 discharged Gogoi of all the charges against him.It was held that speeches delivered by Gogoi did not contain any incitement to violence.The special court had gone on to the extent of stating that the speeches made by Gogoi far from inciting violence, in fact exhorted people not to resort to violence.The special court had underscored that temporary blockades/protests without incitement to violence would not constitute a terrorist act under Section 15 of UAPA.The three co-accused (Dhirjya Konwar, Manas Konwar and Bittu Sonowal) in the case had also been discharged by the court.The court had found Gogoi had made no imputations prejudicial to unity and integrity of India or national integration. Further, nothing personally or vicariously had linked Gogoi to acts of vandalism observed during the protests.The High Court, however, overturned this verdict on February 9. .The High Court stated that the special NIA Court had 'travelled way beyond the level of sifting of evidence' permissible at the stage of framing charges, and its order read like that of an acquittal than discharge.The High Court noted that the approach of the special court was erroneous in law and had a 'vitiating effect' on its ruling. Further, the special court can shift the matter to a competent court if if finds that the stringent charges under the UAPA or sedition are not made out.It, therefore, remitted the matter back to the special court for fresh consideration on framing of charges..In his appeal before the top court, Gogoi contended that the High Court has in effect called for a roving enquiry into anonymous statements made by protected witnesses in totally different contexts and timelines.Further, the speeches made by him have been examined in the wrong context and given the colour of terrorist activity. Pertinently, he stated that what can be at best misdemeanours or Indian Penal Code offences at face value have been argued by the prosecution as being linked to some deep-rooted conspiracy to destroy the economy and unity of the country. Gogoi argued that nothing in the chargesheet showed any causal link between his activities and any ulterior motive, malafide design or criminal conspiracy to harm the country.The High Court failed to examine if a prima facie case was even made out in the matter, he said..Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi and advocates Ninad Laud and Sahil Tagotra appeared for Gogoi. The appeal was filed through advocate Tagotra. [Read order]