"Person At This Age Would Be Lost Away From Family”: Bombay High Court Orally Remarks In Gautam Navlakha's Plea To Shift Back To Delhi

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday indicated its inclination to permit rights activist Gautam Navlakha to relocate to Delhi, while hearing his plea seeking relaxation of a bail condition that restrains him from leaving Mumbai in the Elgar Parishad–Bhima Koregaon case.

The matter was heard by a Division Bench of Justice Bharati Dangre and Justice Shyam Chandak.

“Consider the fact that he is 73 years old and is away from his family. He is not originally from Mumbai. Even the trial is yet to commence and his discharge application is pending. If he assures that he will attend hearings from the NIA office in Delhi and, as and when required, can be asked to come down to Mumbai, what is your stand?” Justice Dangre asked the ASG.

Navlakha has approached the High Court contending that he is unable to afford living in Mumbai and should be allowed to return to his permanent residence in Delhi. One of the conditions of his bail mandates that he shall not leave Mumbai without prior permission of the court.

Senior Advocate Yug Chaudhary, appearing for Navlakha, submitted that his client is 73 years old and facing severe financial distress.

“My client has become bankrupt. His permanent residence is in Delhi. Let him move back to his residence and I assure the court that he will attend each and every hearing,” Chaudhary submitted.

He further pointed out that the trial in the case is yet to commence and that even Navlakha's discharge application has been pending for the past three years without any response from the prosecution.

“Milords, the trial is yet to begin. Even my client's discharge application is pending for the last three years. The prosecution cannot be allowed to turn into persecution,” Chaudhary argued.

The senior counsel also traced the background of the case, noting that Navlakha was initially placed under house arrest at his Delhi residence before he surrendered. He added that Navlakha had been diligently complying with bail conditions, initially attending trial court proceedings twice a month and now once a month, despite charges not having been framed.

“Please consider the fact that he is away from his family and his age is 73,” Chaudhary urged.

Opposing the plea, Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh submitted that allowing Navlakha to move out of Mumbai would set a wrong precedent.

“If he is allowed, a wrong precedent may be set. Most of the accused in this case are from Tamil Nadu, Karnataka or other States. If he is allowed, others may also file similar applications,” the ASG argued.

Singh also pointed out that the special court had earlier permitted Navlakha to visit Delhi on two occasions for two months each.

“As and when he wishes, he can file an application and the special court will consider the same,” the ASG submitted.

Justice Dangre, however, repeatedly emphasised Navlakha's age, personal circumstances and the prolonged delay in the proceedings.

When the ASG continued to oppose the plea on the ground of precedent, Justice Dangre observed: “A person, especially at this age, would be lost if he lives away from his family. He may feel uprooted from his own society, relatives and friends.”

“You also haven't placed anything concrete on record to show that he is a flight risk. Now just tell us what additional conditions you want us to impose. We will pass orders accordingly,” the Bench told the ASG.

ASG Anil Singh sought a day's time to obtain instructions on the conditions that could be imposed.

The matter has been adjourned to Wednesday morning for further hearing