Introduction and Background
In a significant legal development, the Bombay High Court granted bail to five members associated with the Sanatan Sanstha and Hindu Janjagruti Samiti. These individuals were accused of conspiring to bomb the Sunburn festival in Pune in 2018. The accused, Sujit Rangaswami, Amit Baddi, Ganesh Miskin, Shrikant Pangarkar, and Bharat Kurane, were arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in connection with the alleged plot to execute bomb blasts at the popular music festival. The case, which has garnered considerable media attention, revolves around the alleged intentions of these individuals to disrupt the festival and instill terror among the attendees.
Court's Observations on the Allegations
The division bench, comprising Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande, highlighted that although the accused were charged with conspiracy, the alleged act was never executed. The festival concluded successfully without any incident. This observation played a crucial role in the Court’s decision to grant bail. The judges noted that the arrests occurred eight months after the festival had ended, and no tangible disruption had been recorded during the event itself. This timeline raised questions about the immediacy and evidence of the threat posed by the accused.
Prosecution's Case and Recovery of Arms
According to the prosecution, the five accused were part of a larger group led by prime suspects Sharad Salaskar and Vaibhav Raut. Upon their arrest in August 2018, these leaders allegedly provided the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) with information about hidden arms and ammunition at their residences in Nalasopara, Thane district. Subsequent searches led to further recoveries in Solapur and Pune, resulting in the arrest of 12 individuals under UAPA provisions. The prosecution asserted that the accused were influenced by an extremist ideology aimed at establishing a 'Hindu Rashtra' and targeted those perceived as opponents of Hindu practices.
Charges and Influence of Ideology
The chargesheet alleged that the accused, as active members of the Sanatan Sanstha and Hindu Janjagruti Samiti, conspired to use petrol and crude bombs to attack the Sunburn festival. It was claimed that their actions were motivated by a desire to defend Hinduism from perceived threats and to retaliate against entities they believed disrespected the religion. The prosecution linked the accused to disruptions of cultural events and the murders of prominent rationalists and activists like Dr. Narendra Dabholkar, Govind Pansare, Prof. M.M. Kalburgi, and journalist Gauri Lankesh. These individuals were known for their criticism of superstitions and religious orthodoxy.
Judicial Scrutiny and Bail Decision
The Court scrutinized the evidence presented in the chargesheet and concluded that the allegations were insufficient to substantiate the conspiracy charge against the appellants. The judges expressed concern over the prolonged incarceration of the accused, emphasizing that a speedy trial is a fundamental right. Despite the trial's commencement, only two witnesses had been examined, and the prosecution listed 417 witnesses. The Court noted the lack of progress since September 2023 and recognized the need to balance the accused's right to liberty with the trial's slow pace.
Advocates' Representation and Court's Observations
The appellants were represented by advocates Virendra Ichalkaranjikar, Sanjiv Punalekar, and Jyoti Ghorpade. The State was represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Jayesh Yagnik. The Court highlighted the necessity of a fair and speedy trial, considering that the accused had already spent significant time in detention. The judges remarked that the judicial system must ensure that individuals are not subjected to indefinite pre-trial incarceration, particularly when the evidence is insufficient to justify such a prolonged detention.
Conclusion and Implications
The Bombay High Court’s decision to grant bail to the five accused underscores the judiciary's role in safeguarding individual rights and ensuring justice is served promptly. This case highlights the challenges in balancing national security concerns with the fundamental rights of the accused. The Court's emphasis on the lack of execution of the alleged conspiracy and the slow pace of the trial played a crucial role in its decision. As the legal proceedings continue, the case will be closely watched for its broader implications on the application of anti-terrorism laws and the protection of civil liberties in India.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.