1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI 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 Umar Khalid
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 India.
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