Supreme Court Confirms Order Granting Teesta Setalvad and Husband Interim Anticipatory Bail in Donations Embezzlement Case

Earlier this year, the court had orally asked the CBI and the Gujarat government whether they wanted to send Setalvad and her husband back to custody after the duo had been out on bail for over seven years. On the next occasion, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju informed the bench that they had cooperated with the investigating agency and sought time to seek instructions on “whether anything substantive survived in the matter”.

During today's hearing, the court made absolute a February 2015 order granting interim protection to the social activist couple by directing it to "continue to enure for their benefit", while disposing of their appeal against the Gujarat High Court's initial decision to deny them anticipatory bail in 2015. Not only this, but the court also dealt with a prayer for certain remarks of the Gujarat High Court to be expunged with an observation that these will not weigh with the trial court. "It is trite to say that any observation made at the stage of bail will hardly have any influence on the trial. We are not required to say anything more than that," the bench ordered.

The court also disposed of a plea filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation in 2015 noting that "with a chargesheet having been filled in 2016 and bail having been regularised in 2017, nothing survived in this matter". 

Moreover, while disposing of the petitions challenging the conditional anticipatory bail granted to Setalvad and Anand in February 2019 by the Gujarat High Court in another similar case, the Justice Kaul-led bench pronounced, "The special leave petitions were filed challenging the grant of bail on certain terms and conditions. A considerable passage of time has already elapsed. On our query, we are informed that even chargesheet has not been filed. Learned additional solicitor general submits that there is an element of lack of cooperation on part of respondent and that is why, the chargesheet has not been filed. Be that as it may, all that we would like to say at this stage is, respondents will cooperate will investigation as and when they are required to."

After directing the duo to extend their cooperation to the Gujarat crime branch with respect to their probe, the court added, "Order already granted is made absolute."

Background

Civil rights activist and secretary of NGO ‘Citizens for Justice and Peace’ Teesta Setalvad, along with her husband, came under the scanner for allegedly embezzling funds raised for victims of the 2002 Gujarat riots, after a first information report (FIR) was registered in Ahmedabad under Sections 420, 406, 468, and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 72(A) of the Information and Technology Act, 2000. The allegation was that the duo, along with other trustees, had raised funds from donors in India and abroad on the pretext of building a museum in honour of the riot victims at Ahmedabad's Gulbarg Society that was destroyed in the communal violence, but neither built the museum, nor spent the amount to help the members of the Gulbarga society. The complainant was a resident of the society, Firoz Khan Pathan.

In February 2015, the Gujarat High Court dismissed their application for anticipatory bail. The high court had however granted bail to three riot victims, former residents of Gulbarg Society and co-accused in the embezzlement case. Apart from Citizens for Justice and Peace, Setalvad and Anand were trustees of Sabrang Trust, the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) license of which was cancelled soon after they were denied anticipatory bail in this case.

The high court order was, however, stayed by the Supreme Court on the same day on which the single-judge bench passed it. Subsequently, while directing the interim protection to continue, the matter was referred to a three-judge bench. This interim order against coercive action is still continuing, seven years later.

In the meantime, in February 2019, the same high court bench of Justice JB Pardiwala allowed anticipatory bail to the two Mumbai-based activists with respect to an FIR lodged in March 2018 on the strength of a complaint by Raees Khan Pathan, a former aide of Setalvad, directing them to cooperate with the investigation and appear before the probe agency as and when required. This order has also been challenged by the Gujarat crime branch, as well as by Setalvad and Anand. 

In related news, the Supreme Court in July granted bail to the civil rights activist in respect of a police complaint accusing Setalvad of fabricating evidence and instituting false proceedings in relation to the Gujarat riots conspiracy case.

Case Title

Teesta Atul Setalvad v. State of Gujarat | Criminal Appeal No. 338 of 2015 and other connected matters