The Bombay High Court Tuesday dismissed a petition filed by Gautam Navlakha seeking to be removed from Tiloja jail and put under house arrest instead. In his plea, Navlakhan indicated that the unlivable conditions at Tiloja jail were the grounds for his request to be transferred from jail to house arrest. Gautam Navlakha is among the 15 urban Naxals arrested by NIA for their role in instigating violence resulting in the Bhima-Koregaon violence and planning an assassination plot of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
BREAKING: Bombay High Court dismisses Bhima Koregaon Violence accused Gautam Navlakha’s plea seeking “house arrest” instead of being lodged in prison. NIA had opposed this plea stating that the accused was “indirectly seeking bail under the garb of house arrest”.
— LawBeat (@LawBeatInd) April 26, 2022
NIA had opposed this plea stating that the accused was “indirectly seeking bail under the garb of house arrest”. The National Investigation Agency (NIA) and state prison authority, while opposing the plea, had stated that sufficient facilities were provided to the accused. It said there were many prisoners who were 70 or above and had comorbidities and if Navlakha’s plea was allowed, there would be a flood of such applications in the courts.
Hearing the plea, a division bench of Justices Sunil Shukre and GA Sanap ruled that Navlakha’s issues in prison might be brought before the trial court for appropriate action.
“Petitioner would be at liberty to bring to the attention of presiding officer of special NIA court the grievances in respect of difficulties faced by him and the said officer directed to ensure grievance redressed within parameters of the law,” the court observed.
The detailed judgment will be made available in due course.
Navlakha had applied to the court for home arrest early last year. He cited the lack of medical facilities at Taloja Prison, where he is currently lodged. Navlakha’s lawyer had told the bench that the quarantine barrack, in which septuagenarian Navalakha has been lodged, was “unfit for human habitation”. “…the ward was filthy and full of grime and cockroaches and bathrooms were extremely unhygienic and extremely dirty with faeces and urine lying on the floor….” They also cited the Supreme Court’s observations when it rejected his default bail application in May 2021.
The Supreme Court had stated that, in appropriate instances, the court may order home arrest under section 167 of the CrPC, taking into account the accused’s age, health, and history. Navlakha said that he fits this definition perfectly.
Navlakha’s complaints of lack of facilities in the prison were denied by Additional Public Prosecutor Sangeeta D Shinde, who represented the state prison authorities.
Hearing both sides of the argument, the Bombay High Court dismissed Gautam Navlakha’s petition.
