SC grants bail to DU professor Saibaba
BY MPost6 April 2016 5:15 AM IST
MPost6 April 2016 5:15 AM IST
The Supreme Court on Monday granted bail to Delhi University professor G N Saibaba, accused of being associated with a front organisation of a banned Maoist outfit.
The Apex Court Bench, headed by Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar, granted bail to Saibaba noting that all the material witnesses in the case have already been examined and there was no basis for keeping him confined.
The court was not moved as counsel for Maharashtra expressed the apprehension that Saibaba would propagate his views if he is set free.
The court said that does not hold as he would be doing so even if he was released later.
Granting bail to Saibaba, the court said his release would be subject to the conditions by the trial court as he would make himself available as and when he was required.
The SC had on February 23 questioned Saibaba’s solitary confinement and asked the state government to make alternate arrangement to house him at Gadchiroli.
“We want you (state) to make him comfortable. Tell us how you will make him comfortable. You cannot have him in solitary confinement,” the SC had told state counsel Nishant Katneshwarkar, directing the state to provide sufficient medical facilities to Saibaba.
In response, Maharashtra said it received intelligence inputs that Maoists have launched a campaign to free the professor.
“There were instances wherein the Naxal leaders were rescued by the Naxalites in Jahanabad (Jharkhand), Dantewada (Chhattisgarh) and Belampalli (Andhra Pradesh),” the government affidavit read.
It referred to a press note published on a website, calling upon the cadres to launch a nationwide public agitation for Saibaba’s release. The note, it said, called upon the cadres to use all means to get him out of custody.
The government was willing to have video recording facility to avoid him undertake long distance road journey.
Arrested in May 2014 from the Delhi University campus, the wheelchair-bound teacher has been in Nagpur jail. He had moved the Supreme Court complaining that he was made to travel 170 km every time to attend his case.
Next Story