Dreaded Naxalite ideologue Prof Saibaba denied bail

Dreaded Naxlite ideologue DU Prof. G N Saibaba serving life term at Nagpur Central Prison

Saibaba was convicted for life and was found guilty of sedition. He was found to be a member of the proscribed anti-national Maoist organization. He was involved in waging war against the Indian State with an oblique motive to overpower the democratically elected government.

A Division Bench of Justice P N Deshmukh and Justice Rohit Deo pronouncing the reserved order noted that the trial court had clearly upheld the prosecution case in which Saibaba’s involvement along with other co-accused was found to have links and they were acting for alleged Naxalite and Maoist and their front organization i.e. RDF, assisting Naxals on the basis of the secret code to facilitate them to achieve their goal. The bench observed that the material produced formed a complete chain establishing applicant’s involvement in the present crime along with other accused and as such merely because the applicant was on bail during the trial, that by itself cannot be the ground to allow him even on merits.

The High Court narrated the history of medical treatment offered to Saibaba and ficilities available including special arrangements made by the prison authorities by allowing mediual check-up by doctors of his choice and medicines prescribed by his doctors.

Justice Deshmukh observed in the order he authored that as per the Supreme Court guidelines, the gravity of the offence, nature of accusation, desirability of releasing the accused, other reasons to release the accused during the pendency of the appeal should be considered before providing any relief to the accused and thus found no good reason to release Saibaba on bail.

Saibaba in his bail plea mentioned his physical infirmity and deteriorating health conditions as primary reasons for seeking bail and extensively cited the order passed by the Bombay High Court which had granted him temporary bail after its initial rejection by the Nagpur Bench.

Senior counsel Mihir Desai has argued for Saibaba, seeking his immediate bail on health ground. Saibaba had also sought permission to avail treatment at Telangana, but the prosecution had strongly opposed the move while producing on record a communication from a naxal organization revealing the game plan to free Saibaba once he was allowed to go out of Maharashtra.

Based on intelligence inputs and confidential reports secured from security agencies, the state government had also objected to inclusion of two private doctors with close links to naxal movement treating Saibaba.

Taking serious cognizance of apprehensions raised by the prosecution backed by vigilance report, the HC had also put a very stringent condition including CCTV surveillance of entire examination and presence of government doctors during the entire time.

Saibaba was arrested in May 2014 by Gadchiroli police and lot of incriminating information was recovered from his hard disk. Considered as a big catch against the fight against the Red Terror, Saibaba was booked for sedition and helping members of the banned outfit for the offence punishable under Sections 13, 18, 20,38 and 39 of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) (Amendment 2008) registered with Aheri police station.

The trial court had held Saibaba, Mahesh Tirki, Pandu Narote, Hem Mishra, Prashant Rahi gulty for offence punishable under sections 18, 13, 38 and 39 of the UAPA read with Section 120B of IPC and sentenced them for life while observing that Naxal movement poses a greatest internal security threat to India.

Saibaba and others had challenged their conviction before the BHC. They had questioned the very basis of their conviction and claimed that they had no role in violent activities and mere possession of literature was no crime and they could not be prosecuted and convicted on the basis of such a weak evidence.

Special Public Prosecutor P K Sathianathan who successfully led the prosecution legal team before the trial court also appeared before the HC and vehemently opposed granting of any relief to Saibaba placing on record medical help provided to him by the expert doctors along with arrangements in his own room looking at his physical infirmity.

According to him, accused was involved in waging war against the state, indulged in terror activities and conspired to overpower institutions and government and unleashed a reign of terror and deserved no sympathy.