The court also mandated that Navlakha must pay Rs 20 lakh to cover the expenses for the security provided during his house arrest.
“Leave Granted. The charges are not framed…numerous witnesses running up to 370…co-accused(s) have been granted bail…Respondent submitted that some of the co-accused have not been granted bail…appellant has been incarcerated for four years…the appellant has been under house arrest…the High Court has passed a detailed order. The trial will take years and years…we direct the Appellant to pay twenty lakhs. This amount will have to be paid as a pre-condition for bail. The Appellant shall cooperate with the trial court,” the Supreme Court bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice S.V.N. Bhatti observed.
The National Investigation Agency (NIA) informed the Supreme Court that Gautam Navlakha, accused in the Bhima-Koregaon case, owes the state Rs 1.64 crore for the expenses incurred during his house arrest. The NIA also stated that citizens are not entitled to house arrest.
Senior Advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan, representing Navlakha, submitted that he is 75 years old and suffering from various health issues.
The court clubbed both the matters, Navlakha’s old age and the expense he has to bear for his house arrest, stating, “We will hear both matters together. We are not extending the interim order. This way, the problem of the mounting amount will not arise. All co-accused have been granted bail.”
In one fell swoop, the judiciary not only granted relief to Gautam Navlakha, one of the accused in the 2018 Bhima Koregaon violence, not just with bail but also did away with holding him under house arrest.
The court’s magnanimity bestowed upon Navlakha is not a recent phenomenon. For some time now, Navlakha has been treated with unusual kindness that belies the seriousness of the accusations levelled against him.
The case against Navlakha involves alleged inflammatory speeches made at the Elgar Parishad conclave in Pune on December 31, 2017, which allegedly triggered violence the following day near the Koregaon-Bhima war memorial on the outskirts of the city in western Maharashtra, where lakhs of Dalits had gathered to celebrate the 200th anniversary of the Battle of Bhima Koregaon, won by the British Army—comprising mostly soldiers from the Dalit community—against the Peshwas in 1818.
Moreover, Navlakha had reportedly visited the United States thrice in the period between 2010-2011 and written to a US district court judge seeking clemency for Fai, who was arrested by the FBI in 2011 on the charges of accepting funds to the tune of several million from the ISI and the Pakistan government.
In another case, on 31st December 2023, the Delhi Police interrogated Navlakha in Mumbai in connection with the NewsClick funding case. He was questioned about his association with NewsClick’s founder and Editor-in-Chief Prabir Purkayastha, as well as his shareholding in the company, PPK NewsClick Studio Pvt Ltd.
Yet, the courts have been exceptionally lenient against him, humouring his demands and treating him with kid gloves.
SC grants ‘house arrest’ to Gautam Navlakha on ‘medical grounds’
In November 2022, the SC granted ‘house arrest’ of Gautam Navlakha on ‘medical grounds’ despite vehement opposition by the probing agency. Before the house arrest order, Navlakha was lodged in Navi Mumbai’s Taloja prison in connection with the Bhima Koregaon case.
The court had expressed staggering concern for the health of Navlakha saying to the ASG, “Place whatever restrictions. At least let him remain in house arrest for a few days. Let’s try to work it out… How old are you? 68? So, you might understand”.
These comments by the Supreme Court were made even as ASG SV Raju, appearing for the NIA, detailed the grave charges against Navlakha and told the court that his health condition had improved and he had no complaints at the moment. “They want to obtain bail by hook or crook. They will say the trial is being delayed. So many bail applications filed. Today discharge application was filed”, ASG said.
However, the Supreme Court turned down ASG’s request and granted ‘house arrest’ to Navlakha. During his house arrest, the court also allowed Navlakha to live with his partner without using the phone. He was also granted permission to meet 2 members of his family, once a week.
Bombay HC grants bail to Gautam Navlakha saying he ‘merely intended’ to commit a terror act but didn’t attempt it
A year later, in December 2023, the Bombay High Court granted bail to Bhima Koregaon violence accused Gautam Navlakha. In its order, the division bench comprising Justice AS Gadkari and Justice SG Dige noted that Navlakha merely intended to commit the terrorist at and did not attempt the same.
The HC, in its order, stated, “In the present case, the incriminating material as adverted herein above does not in any manner prima facie lead to draw an inference that, Appellant has committed or indulged in a ‘terrorist act’ as contemplated under Section 15 of UAP Act.”
“According to us, the record prima facie indicates that it was at the most the intention of the Appellant to commit the alleged crime and not more than it. The said intention has not been further transformed into preparation or attempt to commit a terrorist act, to attract Section 15 of the UAP Act.”
The court also stated in its order that Navlakha had not committed any covert or overt terrorist act. “Even though in the said documents, the authors of it have expressed their intention to cause fatality to the politically influential persons or to cause tremendous disturbance in the Society at large, the Appellant only being a member of the party cannot be prima facie held to be a co-conspirator to it. From the material on record, it appears to us that, no covert or overt terrorist act has been attributed to the Appellant,” the order states.
And now, six months after the Bombay High Court granted Navlakha bail, the Supreme Court also followed suit, granting relief to the Urban Naxal accused of provoking violence in Bhima Koregaon in 2018, raising questions over whether the judiciary has meted out preferential treatment to Navlakha and others in the case, on account of their political and social status and pressure from the urban naxals lobby, and if it had displayed the same level of generosity if such grave allegations of inciting violence and riots were levelled against a common citizen.
