On Thursday, the High Court of Bombay asked the Maharashtra Govt to produce any additional documents or records to show that a Pune Sessions Court Judge K D Vadane who granted an extension of time to the police to file its charge sheet against lawyer Sudha Bharadwaj, had the jurisdiction to do so. Bharadwaj is accused of Maoist links in the 2018 Elgar Parishad case.
Bharadwaj has petitioned the High Court to seek default bail on the ground that the Judge was not a designated special judge under the National Investigation Act (NIA) as was necessary, since the special anti-terror law, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, was invoked against her & other co-accused at the relevant time.
Her lawyer, Yug Chaudhry, said a reply given by the High Court registry under the Right to Information Act (RTI) had said the judge was not designated at the time he took cognizance of the charge sheet against her.
On Thursday, a bench of Justice S S Shinde & Justice N J Jamadar noted that the records produced by its registry “matched” with what was given under RTI to her as mentioned in her petition. At the hearing earlier this week, Chaudhry said the Pune judge had worn the cloak of a special Judge, but he was not one under law & the HC said it would seek records from the registry & also had sought records from the state. Chaudhry submitted in cases of scheduled offences such as those under the UAPA, a sessions Judge has no power to take cognizance, only a “special” court would have jurisdiction & it has to be set up by the state or the Centre.
Chaudhry had also asked if at the time other special Judges were functioning in Pune. The High Court said the records show there were special Judges in Pune at the time when the matter came up before Judge Vadane.
The HC said to state public prosecutor Aruna Pai: “Show us any document through which principal district judge empowered Vadane to hear the matter.” She sought time.
For the NIA, Anil Singh, additional solicitor general, said it was not necessary for only a special court to have handled the case in Pune & as the judge was qualified, he rightly presided over the case there. But Chaudhry said there is a “vast difference” between a judge being qualified to be a special Judge & actually being designated as one.
Bharadwaj was arrested in Aug 2018.
The NIA took over the probe in Jan 2020. Singh said the charges against her were serious under the UAPA & it was a question of “national security” & nothing could be more important.
The High Court will continue hearing her plea on July 15.
Source Link
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure.
0 Comments