Activist Sudha Bharadwaj, accused in Bhima-Koregaon case, to be released from jail

Advocate-activist Sudha Bharadwaj, accused in the Koregaon-Bhima case, has been asked to furnish a cash bond of Rs 50,000 with one or more sureties by the Special NIA court for granting her bail.

NEW DELHI: Advocate-activist Sudha Bharadwaj, accused in the Koregaon-Bhima case, will be released from jail on Wednesday, a day after getting relief from the Supreme Court.

She is set to walk free soon after spending nearly 3 years in jail. She has been asked to furnish a cash bond of Rs 50,000 with one or more sureties by the Special NIA court as a precondition for granting her bail.

Bhima Koregaon case: Advocate-activist Sudha Bharadwaj to be released from jail on a cash bond of Rs 50,000 with one or more sureties, rules Special NIA court

(File photo) pic.twitter.com/DQaam2O42k — ANI (@ANI) December 8, 2021

Bharadwaj's lawyer had pleaded before  NIA court in Mumbai to order her release from Byculla jail today itself. To which, the judge said that the order would be issued after receiving the necessary documents and verification.

The Supreme Court had 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.

"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 provisions of the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. The top court had agreed on Monday to accord urgent hearing to the NIA plea challenging the Bombay High Court order granting default bail to Bharadwaj.

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, while granting default bail, had held that the additional sessions judge of Pune, which had extended the time period beyond 90 days for filing 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.

At the outset of the hearing on Tuesday, Additional Solicitor General (rpt Additional Solicitor General) Aman Lekhi, appearing for the NIA, said the high court wrongly interpreted the law in granting default bail to the accused.

Under a provision of 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.

Lekhi referred to the chronology of the case and said the 90-day period for filing the charge sheet as regard to Bharadwaj had expired on January 25, 2019. Bharadwaj is the first among 16 activists and academicians arrested in the case to have been granted default bail.

Poet-activist Varavara Rao is currently on medical bail. Jesuit priest Stan Swamy died in a private hospital here on July 5 this year while waiting for medical bail. The others are in custody as undertrials.

The high court had rejected the default bail plea filed by eight other co-accused in the case -- Sudhir Dhawale, Varavara Rao, Rona Wilson, Surendra Gadling, Shoma Sen, Mahesh Raut, Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira.

The case relates to alleged inflammatory speeches delivered at the Elgar Parishad conclave, held at Shaniwarwada in Pune on December 31, 2017, which the police claimed triggered violence the next day near the Koregaon-Bhima war memorial located on the city's outskirts.

The Pune police had claimed the conclave was backed by Maoists. The probe in the case was later transferred to the NIA.