Bhima Koregaon Case | Supreme Court Directs Tagging Of Jyoti Jagtap's Bail Plea With Shoma Sen's Appeal

Advocate Aparna Bhat, appearing for Jagtap, said she had no objection to the tagging of the matters but raised concerns about the prolonged period of incarceration. Noting the submissions by the two counsel, Justice Bose adjourned the hearing after pronouncing the following order -  

"When this appeal is called out for hearing, it is jointly submitted by parties' counsel that there are several appeals originating out of same FIR. It would be in the interest of justice if all these appeals are heard together. In view of these submissions, we direct tagging of this appeal with [Shoma Kanti Sen's] appeal."

Recently, another bench comprising Justices MM Sundresh and SC Sharma, directed that the matter relating to the bail of co-accused Gautam Navlakha be tagged along with the connected matters.

On an earlier occasion, in July last year, a bench led by Justice Bose had postponed Jagtap's bail hearing. The reason cited was that the verdicts on Vernon Gonsalves' and Arun Ferreira's bail pleas were anticipated to be delivered shortly. The bench also allowed the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and the State of Maharashtra to file their counter-affidavits within three weeks. Later in the month, Gonsalves and Ferreira were granted bail by the Supreme Court after almost five years in custody. Justice Bose, along with Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, besides taking into consideration the length of incarceration, also held that the seriousness of the allegations alone could not be a ground to deny bail and justify their continued detention.

Subsequently, when Jagtap's bail plea was taken up again, the court indicated that deciding the application would involve a determination of whether her case 'fits the formula' in which the bail pleas of co-accused Gonsalves and Ferreira were decided. Justice Bose remarked, "There is a formula in which we have decided the other two. The question is whether this fits in that formula or not." Echoing this, on a subsequent date, the judge indicated that the test to decide Jagtap's bail plea was whether the contents recovered from her electronic devices disclosed an offence under Chapters IV and VI of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

Background

Jyoti Jagtap, an activist and member of cultural organisation 'Kala Kabir Manch', and 16 others, including Gonsalves and Ferreira, have been accused by the National Investigation Agency of being responsible for the caste violence at Bhima Koregaon in Pune, although one of them – Jesuit priest and tribal rights activist Father Stan Swamy passed away in July 2021.

The Pune police and later, the NIA contended that inflammatory speeches at Elgar Parishad – an event to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the Battle of Koregaon Bhima – triggered the violent clashes that broke out between Maratha and Dalit groups near the village of Bhima Koregaon in Maharashtra. This led to the 16 activists being arrested for allegedly conspiring and planning the violence and charged with various provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act based on letters and emails primarily retrieved from their electronic devices.

In February of last year, a special NIA court rejected Jagtap's bail application, which was later upheld by the Bombay High Court in October. While rejecting her application, a division bench of the high court comprising Justices AS Gadkari and Milind Jadhav held that dialogues in Kabir Kala Manch's plays that ridiculed phrases like 'Ram Mandir', 'Gomutra', and 'Acche Din' – aimed at the democratically elected government – incited hatred and indicated a larger conspiracy. The bench held:

“There are a number of innuendos in the text, words, and performance of Kabir Kala Manch which are pointed directly against the democratically elected government, for seeking to overthrow the government, ridicule the government…Kabir Kala Manch admittedly performed and incited hatred and passion by performing on the above agenda in the Elgar Parishad event. There is thus definitely a larger conspiracy within the Elgar Parishad conspiracy by Kabir Kala Manch and Communist Party of India (Maoist).”

Therefore, the court held that the National Investigation Agency's contention regarding Jagtap having conspired, attempted, advocated and abated the commission of a terrorist act was prima facie true. “The Elgar Parishad event is thus a smaller conspiracy within the larger design and conspiracy of CPI (M) to further its agenda…It is also seen that CPI (M) has chalked out a detailed strategy for furtherance of its objective to overthrow the democratically elected government of our country and the Appellant and other co-accused are prima facie actively strategising the same,” the bench held.

Case Details

Jyoti Jagtap v. National Investigation Agency & Anr. | Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 5997 of 2023