The Supreme Court of India has done well to dismiss the government’s strong opposition to granting bail to the activist.
The Supreme Court of India has done well to dismiss the government’s strong opposition to granting bail to the activist.
in giving Activist Teesta Setalvadi gets interim bailThe The Supreme Court of India has strongly reprimanded the Gujarat governmentThe one who vehemently opposed his release arrest him To pursue allegations of involvement of high officials in the 2002 Gujarat riots. The order of a bench headed by Chief Justice of India, Justice UU Lalit is limited in scope, as it will now be the Gujarat High Court which will decide on it. Grant of regular bail on merits. However, its real significance is that it is a strong push against a government that is bent on putting them behind bars for daring to aid the victims of heinous communal violence in their efforts to get justice. In an earlier judgment supporting the findings of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) that acquitted then Chief Minister Narendra Modi, the Supreme Court virtually campaigned for the arrest and trial of Ms Setalvad and former police officers, RB Sreekumar and Sanjiv Bhatt. did. , The court had accused him of “boiling the pot” in a derogatory reference to his help in seeking justice for the deaths of Zakia Jafri, former MP Ehsan Jafri and several others in the mob. Attack on Gulberg Society in Ahmedabad. In the cases registered in response to Supreme Court orders, the three have been accused of being part of a conspiracy to forge documents and produce false evidence in court to implicate political leaders.
The Supreme Court during the debate raised some sharp and pertinent questions to the State Government represented by the Solicitor General of India. An important consideration was the unusually long adjournment of the bail hearing before the Gujarat High Court, which issued a notice to the police to return after nearly six weeks. While the Solicitor General raised technical objection to Ms Setalvad approaching the Supreme Court despite the High Court proceedings being continued, the Bench was of the view that such a long adjournment could be granted interim bail till the hearing. Ultimately, the Bench has clarified that the High Court will take an independent view without being affected by any of its observations. It also seems to have taken into account a provision in the law that allows grant of bail on the ground that the accused is a woman. Noting that the documents allegedly forged and submitted to the court pertain to the period prior to 2012 and that he was in custody for more than two months and custodial interrogation was conducted for seven days, the Bench It felt right that grant of interim relief would suffice. in order. The relief given to Ms Setalvad should be welcomed by those who value individual liberty as well as activism in support of the vulnerable.