Slogans for Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam: Mumbai court denies anticipatory bail to two TISS students

Slogans seeking the release of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam at a campus gathering were among the reasons cited by a Mumbai sessions court while rejecting anticipatory bail pleas of two students of the TATA Institute of Social Service (TISS) in a case registered against them by the Mumbai Police. 

Additional sessions judge VB Bohra observed that the Supreme Court had denied bail to the Khalid and Imam in the Delhi riots case against them and students are expected to respect the law of land.

The sessions court passed the orders on August 7 in connection with a first information report (FIR) registered at Trombay police station and subsequently taken over by the Crime Investigation Department (CID).

The FIR alleged that 10 to 12 students assembled without TISS administration’s permission near a hostel and paid homage to human rights activist late GN Saibaba by lighting candles, reading his poems and raising slogans calling for the release of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. 

The Court recorded that Saibaba was acquitted by the Bombay High Court in a terror case before his death and hence, merely paying tribute to him could not be treated as illegal.

However, the judge distinguished two students, Kamakhya Das and Abhirup Paul, on the basis of the material allegedly recovered from them during the investigation. 

In Das’s case, the Court noted that certain books allegedly published by members of the CPI (Maoist) had been found downloaded on the electronic devices and some information was allegedly deleted. It also referred to the prosecution allegation that they had not cooperated on material particulars and had threatened a police officer during the pendency of the bail plea.

“Though the accused have not committed criminal offence but their act coupled with the fact of material found with applicant accused Kamakhya Das, certainly raises doubt about her conduct, which suggested her involvement in the alleged crime,” the court held. 

It added that custodial interrogation was necessary to ascertain her intention in downloading the books and allegedly raising the slogans.

The court adopted similar reasoning in rejecting Paul’s plea.

“Certain books published by the members of the Indian Communist Party (Maoist) were found downloaded and saved. Even the WhatsApp chatting found in his mobile phone suggested that he had attended various places as a field work. Moreover, certain information was deleted by him. From all these materials, it appeared that he is allegedly inspired by the thinking or ideology of Maoist,” the court held.

It also took note of the prosecution’s allegation that Paul was associated with the Progressive Students Forum, which allegedly used social media to pressure the complainant in the case, and that a prosecution witness had been threatened.

While clarifying that “mere downloading the books published by the Maoist Organization would not amount to an offence,” the court held that Paul’s conduct required custodial interrogation to ascertain his intention and any possible links with a banned organisation.

The judge, however, granted anticipatory bail to seven other accused after finding that the allegations against them were limited and custodial interrogation was not warranted.

Anticipatory bail was granted to Uttkarsh Khuntia, Yash Kaundilya, Avantika, Ishpreet Kaur, Nikita Monica Dsouza, Hardika Bhagat and Satyam Yadav.

The Court observed that no incriminating material was recovered from them apart from allegations of participation in the programme, slogan-raising or reading a poem in some cases. It also recorded that they had cooperated with investigators.

The orders also invoked the principle that “bail is a rule and jail is an exception.”

The seven were directed to furnish personal bonds of ₹25,000 with one surety each, cooperate with the CID, refrain from influencing witnesses and not leave India without trial court permission.

[Read orders]