Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Dr. Anand Teltumbde, a senior professor and chair of Big Data Analytics at Goa Institute of Management, was arrested as accused No.10 in FIR No. RC-01/2020/NIA/MUM registered by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAP Act). The case arose from the Elgar Parishad program held on 31.12.2017 at Shaniwarwada, Pune, which was followed by violence on 01.01.2018 at Bhima Koregaon. The NIA alleged that the appellant was part of a conspiracy to incite violence and secessionist activities. The appellant filed a bail application before the Special Judge, Greater Bombay, which was rejected on 12.07.2021. He then appealed to the Bombay High Court under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008. The court considered the stringent provisions of Section 43D(5) of the UAP Act, which restricts bail unless the court is satisfied that there are no reasonable grounds for believing the accusation is prima facie true. The court analyzed the material on record, including the appellant's speeches and writings, and found that they did not incite violence or advocate secession. The court noted that the appellant is a senior academician with no criminal antecedents and that the trial may take a long time. The court held that the NIA failed to establish a prima facie case against the appellant under the UAP Act. The court also considered the appellant's age (72 years) and health conditions. The court allowed the appeal and granted bail to the appellant on certain conditions, including furnishing a personal bond and surety, surrendering his passport, and not tampering with evidence.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Bail - Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 - Section 43D(5) - Prima Facie Case - The court examined whether there were reasonable grounds to believe the accusation against the appellant was prima facie true. Held that the appellant's speeches at the Elgar Parishad did not incite violence or advocate secession, and there was no material linking him to any terrorist act or conspiracy. The court granted bail, noting that the appellant is a senior academician with no criminal antecedents and that the trial may take long. (Paras 1-56) B) Criminal Law - Conspiracy - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 120-B - The court found no evidence of a criminal conspiracy between the appellant and other accused to commit unlawful activities. The appellant's participation in the Elgar Parishad was as a speaker, and his speeches were within the realm of academic discourse. (Paras 30-45) C) Criminal Law - Unlawful Activities - Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 - Sections 13, 16, 17, 18, 18B, 20, 38, 39 - The court held that the appellant's alleged association with banned organizations or advocacy of secession was not supported by sufficient material. The NIA's case relied on speeches and writings that did not meet the threshold of 'unlawful activity' under the Act. (Paras 20-35)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant, a senior professor, is entitled to bail under the stringent provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, particularly in light of Section 43D(5) which imposes restrictions on grant of bail if the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against such person is prima facie true.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. The impugned order dated 12.07.2021 is set aside. Appellant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with one or two sureties. Conditions include surrendering passport, not tampering with evidence, and not leaving the country without court permission.
Law Points
- Bail under UAP Act
- Section 43D(5) of UAP Act
- Prima facie case test
- Role of speeches in inciting violence
- Conspiracy under Section 120-B IPC
- Unlawful activities
