1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.: OF 2020 DISTRICT: MUMBAI Surandra P. Gadling ) … Applicant V/s NIA ) …Respondents INDEX Sl.No. Particulars Page No’s

1. Synopsis A-C

2. Memo of Application 1-9

3. Exhibit A 10-14 Copy of application for temporary bail 4. Exhibit B 15-16 Reply of Prosecution 5. Exhibit C 17-20 Copy of Death Certificate 6. Exhibit D 21-24 Impugned Order, dated 11/09/2020 6. Vakalatnama 25

Mumbai Dated : 22/09/2020

Advocate for Appellant 2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.: OF 2020 DISTRICT: MUMBAI

Surandra P. Gadling ) … Appellant

V/s

NIA ) …Respondents

SYNOPSIS

Sl.No. Date Particulars

1. 31/12/2017 Alleged incident ought to have taken place

within the jurisdiction of Vishrambaug

Police Station

2. 08.01.2018 FIR registered by the Vishrambaug Police

Station

3. 28.08.2019 Appellant arrested.

4. Charge sheet filed against Appellant and

others for offence under Sections 121,

121A, 124A, 153A, 505(1)(b),117, 120B

r/w 34 IPC, 1860 and under Section 3

13,16,17,18,18B, 20, 38, 39, & 40 of the

Unlawful Activities Protection Act.

5. 06.11.2018 Bail Application of the Appellant rejected

by Order passed by the Learned Additional

Sessions Judge, Pune.

6. A Bail application filed by the Appellant in

High Court bearing No.: 3603/2020 is

pending.

7. 15.08.2020 Appellant’s mother expired at Nagpur

8. 17.089.2020 Appellant filed a bail application before the

Learned Special Judge, NIA, Mumbai

9. 11.09.2020 Bail plea of the Appellant for temporary

bail was rejected.

POINTS TO BE URGED:

Whether the Appellant is entitled for bail for reasons urged in Memo of Bail Application.

ACTS TO BE RELIED UPON

a) Indian Penal Code, 1860

b) Unlawful Activities Prevention Act 4

c) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

JUDGEMENTS TO BE RELIED UPON

At present none.

Mumbai

Dated : 22/09/2020

Advocate for Appellantt

5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.: OF 2020 DISTRICT: MUMBAI

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL

UNDER SECTION 21(4) OF

NATIONAL INVESTIGATION

AGENCY ACT, 2008 ARISING

FROM ORDER DATED 11.09/2020

PASSED BY THE LEARNED

SPECIAL JUDGE, CITY CIVIL &

SESSIONS COURT, GREATER

BOMBAY BY WHICH THE

APPLICATION FOR BAIL OF THE

APPELLANT WAS REJECTED IN

CRIMINAL CASE BEARING NIA

SPECIAL CASE NO.:414/2020

CHARGE : SECTIONS 121, 121-A,

124-A, 153-A, 505 (1) (B), 117, 120-

B R/W 34 OF THE INDIAN PENAL

CODE AND SECTIONS 13, 16, 17,

18, 18-B, 20, 38, 39, 40 OF THE 6

UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES

(PREVENTION) ACT.

Surendra Pundalik Gadling )

Aged about 51 Years, having address at )

Flat No 79, Misal Layout Bhim Chowk, ) jadiptka, Napur . ) … Appellant

V/s

Senior Inspector of Police, )

National Investigation Agency ) …Respondents

HUMBLE APPLICATION OF BAIL

ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

ABOVENAMED

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. Being aggrieved with Order, dated 11.09.2020 passed by the

Learned Special Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court, Mumbai in

NIA Special Case No.: 414/2020 the Appellant prefers the

present Appeal as provided under Section 21(4) of the National

Investigation Agency Act, 2008. By the said Order the

Application of the Appellant for temporary bail was rejected

2. The Appellant along with 10 others face trial for offence

sections 121, 121-A, 124-A, 153-A, 505 (1) (b), 117, 120-B r/w 7

34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 13, 16, 17, 18, 18-B,

20, 38, 39, 40 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

3. The Appellant / Accused state that Sessions Case, bearing N.I.A

Special Case No.: 414/2020 arises out of transfer of ATS

Special Case No. 01/2018 from the files of Learned Special

Judge, Pune. The said ATS Special Case No. 01/2018 arises

from C.R. No.4/2018 registered by the Vishrambaug Police

Station. On 22.01.2018, the Commissioner of Police, Pune City,

passed Orders withdrawing the investigation in C. R. No.

4/2018 of Vishrambaug P.S. from Senior P. I., Vishrambaug PS

and handing it over to the Assistant Commissioner of Police,

Swargate Division, Pune City, the Respondent No.1.

4. Infact on 03.01.2018, one Akshay Bhikad made a complaint at

the Vishrambaug P.S. against speakers at the Elgar Parishad,

Gujarat MLA Jignesh Mevani and Delhi student

alleging that the programme had led to violence on 01.01.2018

at Bhima–Koregaon, around 40 kms away from the site of the

Elgaar Parishad of 31.12.2017. It was this complaint, which

was registered as F.I.R. / C. R. No. 2/2018 under sections 153-

A, 505 (1)(b) and 117 IPC. Thereafter a second FIR dated

08.01.2018 by one Tushar Damgurde was registered as C.R. 8

No. 4/2018 of Vishrambaug PS under Sections 153-A, 505 (1)

(b), 11, 34 of IPC.

5. After filing charge sheet by the concerned Police Station, ie

ACP, Vishrambaug Police Station, the Learned Special Judge

took cognizance of offence under offence Sections 121, 121-A,

124-A, 153-A, 505 (1) (b), 117, 120-B r/w 34 of the Indian

Penal Code and Sections 13, 16, 17, 18, 18 B, 20, 38, 39, 40 of

the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and amended act 2008

& 2012, against the present Appellant on 15.11.2018 and

against few others on 21.02.2019. The charge sheet is

voluminous and the Appellant craves leave to refer to and rely

upon the charge sheet as and when necessary and produced.

6. An application for bail filed by the Appellant before the

Learned Sessions Judge, Pune, before NIA took over, was

rejected by Order, dated 06.11.2019 and a bail application

bearing No.: 3603/2019 has been filed by the Applicant, which

is pending before this Hon’ble High Court.

7. While this was the position and the proceedings kept for

framing charge before the Learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Pune, the Respondent No.: 1 intervened by filing an application

on 29.01.2020 in the court of Learned Special and Additional

Sessions Judge, Pune and prayed for transfer of entire record 9

and proceedings of Special Case ATS Case No.: 1/2018 from

the files of the Learned Special and Additional Sessions Judge,

Pune to a Special Court constituted under NIA Act to Mumbai.

8. By Order, dated 14.02.2020 the Learned Special and Additional

Sessions Judge, Pune was pleased to allow the application of

the Respondent and the proceedings now stand transferred to

the court of Learned Special and Additional Sessions Judge,

Mumbai

9. The Accused was arrested in the above case on 06.06.2018 and

has been in custody since then. Earlier these proceedings were

investigated by the ACP Swar Gate Police Station and charge

sheet was filed in the Court of Learned Special Judge, Pune

vide Special case (ATS) No.: 1/2018.

10. As the mother of the Appellant expired on 15.08.2020, the

Appellant through his counsel made an application for bail on

17.08.2020, copy of which is annexed herewith and marked

EXHIBIT “A”. Thereafter the Prosecution filed their reply on

21.08.2020, copy of which is annexed herewith and marked

EXHIBIT “B”. The Appellant thereafter also submitted Death

Certificate of the Appellant’s mother, copy of which is also

annexed herewith and marked EXHIBIT “C” 10

11. By order, dated 11/09/2020, as stated above, the plea of the

Appellant for grant of temporary on ground that his mother

expired on 15/08/2020 and that he was required to join family

members for last rituals was rejected. Copy of the said Order is

annexed herewith and marked EXHIBIT “D” and hence the

Appellant approaches this Hon’ble Court for temporary bail on

the following amongst other grounds:

a. The Order passed by the Learned Special Judge is bad in

law and erroneous;

b. In the first instance it ought to have been appreciated by

the Learned Special Judge that the plea of the Appellant

was only for temporary bail for a period of 3 weeks and it

was ohn the ground that the Appellant’s mother had

expired on 15.08.2020 and the entire family wanted to

meet or organize a bereavement gathering.

c. The Court ought to have appreciated that due to COVID

it has become difficult to contact one another and in such

a situation insisting for documentary proof to show that

bereavement was organized is totally erroneous;

d. At the most the Learned Special Court could have

considered the plea of the Appellant for a lesser period, if

not inclined for a period of 3 weeks; 11

e. The observations of the Learned Special Judge that

offence is serious is totally misplaced. If that was the

issue, the Court ought to have appreciated the fact that

while the matter was kept for framing charge in

December, 2019, the Respondent took over and in

February, 2020 the matter was transferred to the Learned

Special Court, Mumbai and since February, 2020 the

Respondent in still investigating. In April, they arrested 2

Accused. Again in July, 2020 they arrested another

Accused in mid- August, 2020 they arrested another 3

accused and thus there is no chance that even charge

would be framed in near future; f. So this aspect also ought to have been considered and

what was sought was a temporary bail to meet the family

so that the members could share the grief on account of

the loss of the mother of the Appellant; g. Thus the grounds for rejection is totally erroneous and

consideration weighed by the Learned Special Judge is

bad in law; h. Right to Life is one of the fundamental rights guaranteed

to every citizen even if he is in prison. Even if the

Appellant is Accused of serious crimes and further he is 12

an under trial prisoner his basic human rights cannot be

suspended. Basic human rights are inalienable;

indivisible.

i. The learned special judge failed to consider that since his

arrest on 06/06/2018 i.e more than 2 years the Appellant

is in prison and by not allowing Appellant to share his

grief with his family members it only affects his mental

condition.

12. It is also stated on behalf of the Appellant that at the time of

demise of his mother even his brother could not attend to her

for last rites as he was tested COVID positive.

13. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any of the

foregoing grounds.

14. The Appellant states that no other application or Appeal or

Revision has been filed or is pending in this Hon’ble High

Court or Hon’ble Supreme Court of .

15. The filing of the Appellant’s affidavit may be dispensed with as

he is presently lodged in Taloja Central Jail.

16. The Advocate undertakes to file Vakaltnama as an when it is

made available. Due to COVID undersigned Advocate is unable

to procure Vakalatnama

17. The Appellant, therefore, prays: 13

a) That Order, dated 11.09.2020 passed by the Learned

Special Judge, NIA, City Civil and Sessions Court for

Greater Bombay, be set aside and quashed;

b) That the present Appeal be allowed and the Appellant

be ordered to be released on temporary bail for such

period as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper

on such terms and conditions as this Hon’ble Court

may deem fit and impose;

c) Such further and other orders as this Hon’ble Court

may deem fit and proper in the nature and

circumstances of the case;

Mumbai

Dated ; 22/09/2020

Advocate for Appellant

IN THE HIGH COURT OF

JUDICTAURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE

JURISDICTION

CRI. APPEAL.NO.: /2020

DISTRICT : MUMBAI

Surandra P. Gadling

… Appellant

V/s

NIA

… Respondents

Dated: 22/09/2020

R. Sathyanarayanan Advocate For Applicants 305, Bachubhai Bldg., 187, Dr.D.N.Road, Fort, Mumbai- 400 001 Mob. No.: 9820042060 Adv. Code :I4978