The Supreme Court has granted the Maharashtra government one week’s time, as a last opportunity, to file its affidavit in activist-lawyer Surendra Gadling’s bail plea linked to the Surajgarh Mine Maoist arson case.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday granted the State of Maharashtra one week to file its affidavit in the bail plea filed by activist-lawyer Surendra Gadling, accused in the Surajgarh Mine Arson Case.
The matter was heard by a Bench comprising Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi.
Court Proceedings
At the hearing, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) S.V. Raju, appearing for Maharashtra, informed the Court that the documents related to the case were “on the way” and sought additional time to place them on record.
“I need to place certain documents before the Court; they’re on the way. I request one week’s time,”
said ASG S.V. Raju.
However, the plea was strongly opposed by Senior Advocate Anand Grover, representing Gadling, who argued that the State had failed to act for weeks.
“They were supposed to file earlier as well. I strongly oppose this — no affidavit has been filed for six weeks, the trial hasn’t been bifurcated, and several co-accused remain absconding,”
Grover submitted.
After hearing both sides, the Bench granted one week to the State to file its affidavit, making it clear that this would be the “last opportunity.”
State’s Stand
During earlier hearings, ASG S.V. Raju told the Supreme Court that Surendra Gadling was not merely a sympathizer but “one of the top comrades of the Maoist organisation.”
“This is a case of Naxalite activities… attacking our jawans. These persons have provided logistics in Maoist-infected areas,”
Raju argued.
He further stated that the acts of arson and violence in Gadchiroli were carried out by “Maoists and local militia”, and alleged that Gadling played a direct role in the conspiracy.
“This act of burning the trucks was carried out by Maoists… Our jawans were killed. Maoists are anti-nationals; they are happy if our jawans are killed,”
the ASG told the Court.
Raju also asserted that development in underdeveloped regions like Gadchiroli was being opposed by Maoist groups:
“Naxalites thrive in underdeveloped areas. The entire area of Gadchiroli being poor, was seeing development recently, which the Naxalites did not want.”
The Bench earlier questioned the State on the use of evidence collected in the Bhima Koregaon–Elgar Parishad case against Gadling in the Surajgarh matter.
In response, ASG Raju defended the reliance on such evidence:
“These are documents collected in Bhima Koregaon which show his role in the Surajgarh case. 150 trucks carrying minerals were stopped. It is not the law that if documents seized in one case cannot be used in a different case.”
Background
The Surajgarh Mine Arson Case pertains to an incident where 39 iron ore trucks were allegedly set ablaze by Maoists in the Surajgarh area of Gadchiroli, Maharashtra, in 2013.
An FIR was registered invoking sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), the Maharashtra Police Act, and the Arms Act.
Following the investigation, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) took over the case, claiming that Gadling had direct membership of the Communist Party of India (Maoist), a banned organization.
In January 2023, the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court rejected Gadling’s bail plea, observing that there were “reasonable grounds to believe that the accused was an active member of a banned organization.”
Surendra Gadling is also an accused in the Bhima Koregaon–Elgar Parishad violence case (2018), which is being investigated by the NIA.
He has been charged under multiple provisions of the UAPA and IPC, with the prosecution alleging that he “provided secret information, maps, and aid to underground Maoist rebels.”
The Supreme Court, in a separate hearing earlier this year, deferred Gadling’s bail plea in the Bhima Koregaon case after ASG Raju sought more time on behalf of the NIA.
Case Title:
SURENDRA PUNDALIK GADLING V THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Crl.A. No. 3742/2023
LIVE COVERAGE
Click Here to Read More Reports On Surendra Gadling