Supreme Court Grants Interim Protection To Assam MLA Akhil Gogoi In UAPA FIR

The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought a response from the National Investigation Agency with respect to an appeal filed by activist turned politician Akhil Gogoi against the Gauhati High Court’s decision to set aside a discharge order in connection with offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. A division bench of Justices V. Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal issued notice and enjoined the NIA from taking the legislative assembly member into custody till Friday when the matter is scheduled to be taken up for hearing. The bench pronounced: “Let notice be served on the standing counsel for the state (NIA), for the limited purpose of considering the grant of protection to the petitioner from arrest pursuant to the impugned order, returnable on Friday, February 24. In the meantime, the petitioner shall be protected against arrest in connection with [this] FIR.” Gogoi, an independent legislator representing Assam’s Sibsagar and President of Raijor Dal party, was arrested in December 2019 when the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act were at their peak. He was booked under Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy), 124A (sedition), 153A (promoting enmity between different communities), and 153B (making imputations and assertions prejudicial to national integration) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Various provisions of the UAPA were also pressed into service. Subsequently, even while incarcerated, he contested and won the assembly elections in 2021, defeating Bharatiya Janata Party’s Surabhi Rajkonwari. He was subsequently released after spending one and a half years in detention for his alleged role in the anti-CAA agitation, when a special NIA court discharged him, and three other persons, on the ground of the non-availability of material on record on the basis of which charges could be framed. However, earlier in February, the high court set aside the order of the special court when it was challenged by the federal agency. While remanding the matter back to the court for fresh charge-hearing against all the four accused, a division bench of Justices Suman Shyam and Malasari Nandi observed, “The impugned judgment has the trappings of an order of acquittal rather than an order of discharge. As such, the approach of the special judge, NIA, in our considered opinion, was clearly erroneous in the eye of law, thus having a vitiating effect on the impugned judgment.” It is against this judgement from which the legislator has sought an appeal before the top court, arguing, inter alia, that the high court failed to even examine whether a prima facie case was made out in the matter before overturning the special court’s verdict. Nothing in his conduct could be traced back to an alleged controversy to destroy the national integrity or any terrorist activity, the Raijor Dal president has asserted. The MLA has also been critical of the BJP-led government ‘misusing’ the National Investigation Agency and the anti-terror statute to muzzle dissent. The plaint was filed through Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Sahil Tagotra. Gogoi was represented by Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, Advocate Ninad Laud, and Tagotra. Case Title Akhil Gogoi v. The State (National Investigation Agency) & Ors. | Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 2504 of 2023Click Here To Read/Download Order

Supreme Court Grants Interim Protection To Assam MLA Akhil Gogoi In UAPA FIR

Awstika Das

Tags