In the Surajgarh Mine Arson case, the Supreme Court criticises the prolonged trial delay and directs swift action to expedite proceedings. The bench considers Gadling’s bail plea amid seven years of pre-trial detention.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday heard the bail plea of human rights lawyer Surendra Pundalik Gadling, who has been detained for over six years in connection with the 2016 Surajgarh mine arson case. The Bench, comprising Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Vijay Bishnoi, expressed serious concern over the prolonged delay in the trial and proposed measures to expedite proceedings.
The matter, listed as Criminal Appeal No. 3742/2023 (II-A), has attracted significant attention due to the extended pre-trial detention of the accused and repeated delays in trial proceedings. The case was transferred to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and is pending before the NIA Court in Mumbai.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Anand Grover, representing Gadling, emphasized that the trial has been repeatedly delayed, and Gadling’s production before the trial court has failed on multiple occasions due to non-functional video conferencing facilities.
Grover told the Bench that:
- Gadling was produced three times, but the VC did not work.
- Even after the court’s instructions, the sessions court did not take up the matter.
- The trial has been stalled for almost seven years, despite no trial commencing.
In response, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju argued that the prosecution had not caused any delay in the case.
The Supreme Court expressed its concern over the stalled trial and proposed the following steps:
- Appoint an officer to bring the complete trial record before the Supreme Court.
- Allow both parties one week to inspect the record.
- After inspection, frame charges, fix trial dates, and proceed with arguments.
- The case would be listed again after one month to ensure progress.
The Bench also indicated that it would verify whether a judge was posted in the NIA court in Mumbai and consult the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court to ensure that the trial court is not left vacant.
Senior Advocate Grover highlighted the practical difficulties in examining the voluminous record, particularly electronic evidence, within a week. He emphasized that Gadling’s physical presence is necessary for meaningful inspection.
Grover requested the Court to grant him liberty to argue the bail plea on merits after one month, if no progress is made in the trial.
The Bench assured him that such liberty would be granted if the trial continues to be delayed.
Background: Surajgarh Mine Arson Case
The Surajgarh mine arson case involves the alleged burning of 39 vehicles transporting iron ore to Gadchiroli, Maharashtra, in 2016. The incident was attributed to Maoist militants, and the case was subsequently investigated by the NIA.
Gadling was arrested along with other accused and was charged under multiple provisions, including the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), the Maharashtra Police Act and the Arms Act
In January 2023, the Bombay High Court denied bail to Gadling.
During earlier hearings, the State had alleged that Gadling is one of the top leaders of the Maoist organization and is involved in Naxalite activities. The State claimed that the incident involved the burning of vehicles and the killing of security personnel.
The prosecution argued that evidence collected in the Bhima Koregaon case could be used against Gadling in the Surajgarh case, stating that documents seized in one case can be used in another.
The Supreme Court has proposed a framework to move the trial forward and has reserved the right to revisit the bail plea if the trial remains stalled.
Case Title:
Surendra Pundalik Gadling vs State of Maharashtra
Crl. A. No. 3742/2023
READ LIVE COVERAGE
Click Here to Read More Reports On Surendra Gadling
