Elgaar Parishad Case: Court Told Mere Communication Between Accused Not Ground for Bail Cancellation
In the Elgaar Parishad case, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) is seeking to cancel the bail of four accused — lawyer-activist Sudha Bharadwaj, poet Varavara Rao, and activists Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira — for allegedly violating bail conditions by communicating with each other at a gathering at the Mumbai Press Club in January.
On Friday, Bharadwaj's lawyer, Yug Chaudhry, argued before a special court that mere communication between co-accused cannot be a ground to cancel bail. He stated that the gathering on January 19 was a small, private event to which the accused were invited by journalists, and that discussions centred on prison conditions and difficulties faced while on bail. Chaudhry denied the NIA's allegation that the meeting aimed to propagate the ideology of the CPI (Maoist) or advance the 'Urban Naxal' movement.
Chaudhry submitted that the NIA had not produced any material to prove its allegations. He pointed out that statements recorded from journalists present at the meeting indicated the discussion was journalistic or academic in nature. “Communication between co-accused per se can hardly be a ground to cancel bail. I have interacted with my co-accused on multiple prior occasions when we meet on court dates, including for purposes of providing photocopies of replies, conveying orders,” he told the court.
The lawyer further noted that Bharadwaj was granted bail in December 2021 by the Bombay High Court after spending three years and three months in jail. During her bail period, she reported to the police station 121 times. He emphasised that bail cancellation at this stage would amount to punishment without trial, especially since charges are yet to be framed even after 380 court dates following the filing of the charge sheet.
Special public prosecutor Prakash Shetty argued that the bail conditions explicitly prohibit the accused from communicating with each other. He cited CCTV footage showing the accused meeting and speaking, which, according to the prosecution, constitutes a violation of those conditions.
Varavara Rao's lawyer, R Satyanarayan, countered that the accused were invited by a third party and were unaware of each other's attendance. He asserted that no bail conditions or court reliefs had been violated, and the NIA had not alleged any interference with the trial or evidence tampering.
The court is scheduled to hear arguments from the lawyers of Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira on July 20 before delivering its decision on the NIA's plea.
