SC dismisses plea challenging Pinjra Tod activist Devangana Kalita's bail
New Delhi: While dismissing the Delhi government's plea challenging the bail granted to Pinjra Tod activist and JNU student Devangana Kalita by the Delhi High Court, the Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the prosecution how being an influential person can be grounds enough to withhold bail to an accused. The Justice Ashok Bhushan-led bench also asked how Kalita could tamper with witnesses in the case related to the north-east Delhi riots this February.
Additional Solicitor General SV Raju appeared for the Delhi government and argued that Kalita is a very influential person and the high court has stated that there were only police witnesses in the case. Raju said there are also some protected witnesses in the case.
The bench, also comprising Justices R S Reddy and M R Shah, questioned Raju as to whether being an influential person can be a ground for denying bail as also how she can tamper with the witness. The bench said it would not interfere with the Delhi High Court's decision granting bail to Kalita.
On September 1, the high court had granted bail to Kalita, saying the police failed to show she instigated women of a particular community or gave hate speech as she was seen in a peaceful agitation which is her fundamental right.
It said the agitation, held against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, had been going on for long with print and electronic media present throughout, in addition to the cameras of the police department, but there is no evidence which establishes that the alleged offence took place on Kalita's action.
The evidence produced constituted statements recorded much belatedly, under section 164 CrPC, though the witnesses allegedly remained present at the spot throughout, it said.
Kalita and another member of the group Natasha Narwal were arrested in the case in May by the Crime Branch of Delhi Police and booked under various sections of the Indian Penal Code including rioting, unlawful assembly and attempt to murder. They have also been booked under the stringent anti-terror law, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, in a separate case related to the communal violence, for allegedly being part of a "premeditated conspiracy" in the riots.
