IAPL demands release of advocate Surendra Gadling from Maharashtra jail

Hyderabad: The Indian Association of People’s Lawyers (IAPL) on Monday, March 30, demanded the immediate release of it’s general secretary and eminent advocate from Nagpur Surendra Gadling, an accused in the Bhima-Koregaon and the Surajgarh mine arson cases in Maharashtra for the past eight years.

Gadling is the only one to continue languishing in jail in the Bhima Koregaon case after 15 others accused have been released on bail with some conditions. His discharge petition has been posted for hearing in the Supreme Court this week.

Members of IAPL held a round-table meeting in Hyderabad, where they demanded the release of all political prisoners and the withdrawal of all cases on the activists filed under the draconian Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA).

Demanding the repeal of UAPA, they also demanded an end to the intimidation of activists in the name of “naxalism” and “urban naxalism,” the terms which have not been defined in the dictionary.

The background and the urgent need

One of the team members of the amicus curiae representing revolutionary poet P Varavara Rao. who is accused no 2 in the Bhima Koregaon case, said that Gadling was not only falsely implicated in the case, but also in the Surajgarh mine arson case that allegedly happened two years before it.

Giving the specifics of the Surajgarh case, an advocate said that according to the complainant, around 40-50 people in olive green uniforms and 60-70 in civilian clothing had allegedly set fire to 60-70 of the 100-150 trucks that were carrying iron ore extracts at the time of the incident.

“The complainant has neither given the registration number of his vehicle that was torched, nor has he submitted that he had any acquaintance with either Gadling or Rao. There were a lot of omissions in the complaint, first information report (FIR) and statements recorded,” the advocate alleged.

“When I think about the issue of bail for Gadling or others, I ask myself what if he met the same fate of GN Saibaba or Father Stan Swamy, because he suffers from similar chronic conditions that both of them faced,” the advocate said.

“The state is afraid of an 87-year-old poet (Varavara Rao). The State is afraid of a Dalit human rights lawyer who exposed shoddy police investigations and fake encounters. The state is afraid of any person who challenges it,” the advocate added.

While this was a case-specific concern, experts raised a more alarming issue.

Amending, yet preserving the draconian sections

K Murali, professor of human rights and the director of Access to Justice Program, National Academy of Legal Studies and Research (NALSAR) University of Law, Hyderabad, spoke extensively about how these draconian laws came into existence and how some of them were repealed, while retaining their draconian provisions in the subsequent laws that came into force later.

He explained how the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) had ruled against the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA), which was repealed in 2004, only to have its provisions preserved in the amendment to the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967, in 2008 by the United Progressive Alliance’s government led by the Congress at the Centre.

He recalled how the Attorney General had termed Section 43D(5) of the Act as unconstitutional, which was debated by Congress MPs in Parliament, when former Union Home Minister P Chidambaram pushed through the amendments.

These amendments, the professor said, were concerning the provisions for restricting bail to the accused, and giving undue powers to the special courts like the National Investigation Agency (NIA) courts to restrict such pleas.

The professor cited retired Justice Anjana Prakash of the Patna High Court, where she had said post-retirement, that the Supreme Court was reducing itself to a special court, and that it was no more a constitutional court.

Murali argued that the hands of the Supreme Court and the High Courts were not tied by the UAPA Act, and that the scrutiny of the case diary, chargesheet and other legalities were the domain of the top courts, as the investigating office’s version could be seen only as an opinion in such cases.

Convicts can now have more hopes than accused

He said that if the changing scenario in the delivery of justice in the country needed to be assessed, it was to be seen from the perspective of the changes introduced through the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.

“Section 436(A) of the CRPC has been changed. Under the new law, those who serve half of the sentence while being accused can get bail. For first-time offenders, there is a provision of granting bail if being jailed for 1/3rd period of time for the total sentence. For second time offenders, there is no provision for bail,” he noted.

“However, under BNSS, the life sentence has been given a period of 20 years, but we all know it is till the convict breathes his last. In such cases, the convicted person can be released in seven years. If the sentence is for 10 years, the convict can be released in seven years, and for a lower term of the sentence, the release period has been further reduced,” Murali said, drawing the irony between the way the accused and convicts are being treated presently by the justice system in such cases.

RSS’ goal, Ajit Doval’s order, Mahatma Gandhi’s concern

Professor G Haragopal, who spoke on how the human rights laws that were achieved after movements spanning centuries and have now been reduced to becoming null and void in the 21st Century, said that the final hope was on the citizens to exert pressure to protect their constitutional rights.

He pointed out that it was Surendra Gadling, the counsel for Varavara Rao, who was also falsely implicated in the same case.

He spoke about how a Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s (RSS) meeting in Goa 10-12 years ago had debated for three days against the Constitution, democracy and human rights in the country.

“Any state which uses force is not my state,” he quoted Mahatma Gandhi, from his prayer meeting declaration on January 1, 1948, just 29 days before he was gunned down by Nathuram Godse right after his prayer meet on January 30, 1948.

As a contrast, he also referred to National Security Advisor Ajit Doval’s virtual meeting with all police officers across the country last year, where Doval had said that the fourth war they had to face was with the Indian society.

“A creative debate should happen in society to reclaim the people’s freedom. Continuous pressure should come from the civil society,” Haragopal observed.