Bombay HC denies Bail to Prof. Saibaba, issues Contempt Notice to Arundati Roy for criticising denial of Bail [Read Order]

Bombay HC denies Bail to Prof. Saibaba, issues Contempt Notice to Arundati Roy for criticising denial of Bail [Read Order]


The language used by the author in her article against the Government and the police machinery is as nasty as it could be and one really wonders whether the same would befit to the prestigious awards the author is said to have won, the Court said while issuing contempt notice to Arundati Roy.


Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court has rejected bail application Dr. Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba who was arrested for his alleged links with Maoists. Justice Arun B. Choudhari, while dismissing the bail application also directed registration of Criminal Contempt against the author Arundhati Roy for the article she had written in The Outlook criticising the non-granting of bail to the Professor.

The Professor had approached the Bombay High Court for the second time, after his first bail application on health grounds were rejected. In this application,  an additional ground was also raised about parity in relation to the other accused in the same crime.

The court, rejecting the ground of parity raised observed that, unlike others, there is a prima facie case against the Prof. Saibaba based on the strong evidence and in fact  he is  an  intellectual  has  used  his intelligentsia  for  anti-national  activities  for  which  there  is strong evidence against him.

The court has also asked the Professor to surrender before police  within  forty  eight  hours, failing which he can be arrested by the police.

The Court in its judgement has reproduced an Article written by Arundati Roy which appeared in Outlook, in which she had questioned denial of bail to the Professor. The court said that, instead of challenging the orders passed by Sessions Court and High Court, the author appears to have invented a novel idea of bashing the Central Government,  the  State  Government,  and the Police machinery and the judiciary and that was, prima facie, with a mala fide motive to interfere in the administration of Justice. Following are other observations made in this Judgement about Arundati Roy and her article.



  • The language used by the author in her article against the government and the police machinery is as nasty as it could be and one really wonders whether the same would befit to the prestigious awards the author is said to have won.
  • Calling the Government and  police  as  being  “afraid”  of  the  applicant, “abductor” and “thief” and the Magistrate from a “small town”, demonstrate the surly, rude and boorish attitude of the author in the most tolerant country like India
  • It appears to me that the author thinks that she is above the law and the same stood established when she had  indulged  in  similar  scurrilous  remarks  and  was convicted by the apex Court


This  Court  is  also  surprised  that  despite  the intemperate and humiliating language used against the Central Government, the State Government, the police machinery and the armed forces, they have not taken any action against the author who, in the name of freedom of speech, is exploiting the situation

Read the order here.