Seven years in custody and a plea that never seemed to reach the head of the cause list: the Supreme Court has now fixed November 4 to hear Surendra Gadling’s bail plea in the 2016 Surjagarh mine arson case, after Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal mentioned it.
New Delhi: Activist-lawyer Surendra Gadling, who remains in custody in the 2016 Surjagarh mine arson case in Gadchiroli, Maharashtra, will have his bail plea heard on November 4, the Supreme Court decided on Thursday, although he has already secured bail in the Bhima Koregaon case [Surendra Pundalik Gadling v. State of Maharashtra].
Justice Vikram Nath led the Bench, which also included Justice Sandeep Mehta, and fixed the date after Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal mentioned the matter. The allegations against Gadling are the prosecution’s, they are untested, the Court has expressed no view on the merits, and he is presumed innocent.
Haggling over a date
Gadling has bail in the Bhima Koregaon case, Mr. Sibal told the Bench, but a second case has been registered against him and so he stays in custody. Seven years have gone by, he said, and the plea sat far down the day’s cause list without reaching a hearing. Justice Nath offered October 28. Mr. Sibal asked for October 30, calling it a bail matter on which there was nothing to argue on merits.
Counsel for the State pointed out that the matter is one in which leave has been granted, and Mr. Sibal then asked for a listing the following week. The Court settled on November 4, with the State objecting to an earlier date.
A plea that kept changing hands
The plea has had a long course in the Supreme Court. Justice M.M. Sundresh recused from hearing it, after which it went before a Bench led by Justice J.K. Maheshwari, and Justice Atul Chandurkar later withdrew in April. In July, a Bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Shree Chandrashekhar ordered that the plea be heard by a combination without Justice Chandrashekhar, who had some difficulty with the matter.
Questions on pace, and the State’s stand
The Court has itself questioned the delay on earlier dates, as the LawChakra reports linked in this article show. In September 2025 it asked how long an undertrial can remain in custody without meaningful progress in the trial and sought the State’s explanation, and in October 2025 it gave Maharashtra one week to file its affidavit. Senior Advocate Anand Grover, then appearing for Gadling, pointed to the absence of a permanent public prosecutor, the failure to supply electronic evidence and video-conferencing failures.
Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju opposed bail, describing the case as one of Naxalite activity and contending that documents seized in the Bhima Koregaon case can be used in the arson case. These are the State’s contentions and the Court has not ruled on them.
What the prosecution alleges
According to the prosecution, Gadling was part of a Maoist conspiracy to set fire to more than 80 vehicles carrying iron ore from the Surjagarh mines in Etapalli tehsil of Gadchiroli district in 2016, and he directed others to carry out the arson. Provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and the Indian Penal Code have been invoked against him.
His custody dates from June 2018, in the Bhima Koregaon case investigated by the National Investigation Agency, in which he has since been granted bail. In January 2023 the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court denied him bail in the arson case, and he challenged that order in the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 3742 of 2023.
Where the plea stands
With the Bhima Koregaon bail in hand, Gadling’s continued custody now rests on the arson case alone. His bail plea has waited through repeated recusals and deferrals, and November 4 gives it a fixed date as a regular matter. The Court has not yet considered the merits of bail.
Case Title: Surendra Pundalik Gadling v. State of Maharashtra [Crl.A. No. 3742/2023]
Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta, Supreme Court of India
Date of Hearing: October 15, 2026
Appearances: Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal (Gadling); counsel for the State of Maharashtra