HC asks Maharashtra police not to take away activist Gautam Navlakha from Delhi till morning

The Delhi High Court today directed that rights activist Gautam Navlakha, arrested by Maharashtra police for alleged unlawful activities, should not be taken away from here till it hears the matter tomorrow morning, since the specific allegations against him were unclear.

A bench of Justices S Muralidhar and Vinod Goel said it was "not possible to make out" from the documents, which were in Marathi, what the case was against Navlakha, who is amongst several others arrested today by the Maharashtra police from several cities following searches at the residences on suspicion of Maoist links.

The court also questioned why the witnesses were brought from Pune to authenticate Navlakha's arrest, pointing out that under the law, the witnesses are supposed to be locals from the area where an individual is being arrested.

"What is the specific allegation against him", the bench asked, to which there was no reply from the Maharashtra police officers present in the courtroom.

The bench also said it was informed at 4 PM that a transit remand order was issued by a district court in Saket to take the petitioner to Pune.

It ordered that since it is "not possible to make out from the transit remand application (and other documents) what precisely is the case against the petitioner, he will not be taken away from Delhi".

The court said it will hear the plea as the first matter tomorrow morning and till then Navlakha will be confined to his residence here under the guard of Delhi Police officers and he will be allowed to only meet or speak to his lawyers.

The bench also directed that translated copies of the FIR and other documents, which are in Marathi, be placed before it tomorrow.

The Maharashtra police wanted to take Navlakha to Pune in connection with an FIR lodged there following an event -- 'Elgar Parishad' (conclave) -- held there on December 31 last year that triggered violence at Koregaon-Bhima village in the state.

Several penal provisions under the IPC, including promoting enmity between classes, as well as provisions of terrorist acts, conspiracy and being part of a terror group under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act have been invoked against Navlakha.

The standing counsel for Delhi Police, Rahul Mehra, told the court that the UAPA provisions were added during the course of investigation.

During the brief hearing, advocate Nithya Ramakrishnan, appearing for the rights activist, said he was not present at the event in question and the search at his residence here had not yielded any objectionable material.

She also contended that the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code regarding search and arrest were not followed as the warrants were in Marathi, which Navlakha could not understand, and the grounds for the action were not given in writing.

The habeas corpus plea, moved on behalf of Navlakha through his lawyer Warisha Farasat, claimed that the search at his residence and subsequent detention and arrest was illegal and carried out without following the due process of law.

The petition was first mentioned before a bench of Chief Justice Rajendra Menon and Justice V K Rao by Navlakha's lawyers for urgent listing today.

When urgent listing was allowed, the lawyers immediately approached the bench of Justices Muralidhar and Goel, having the roster for habeas corpus cases, which issued an interim order that the petitioner be not taken out of the state and listed the matter for hearing at 4 PM.

Another bench which has the habeas corpus roster is that of Justices Vipin Sanghi and I S Mehta.

When the hearing started at 4 PM, the bench headed by Justice Muralidhar was initially of the view that since the order of transit remand has been passed, the high court cannot go into it in a habeas corpus plea.

However, after Navlakha's lawyers argued that the procedure of his detention and arrest was illegal, the bench asked the police officers about the time-line of events from his arrest at 2.15 PM till the issuance of the transit remand order by the Saket court.

The bench also noted that all the documents, except the transit remand application, were in Marathi and it would have taken substantial time to give a translated narration of the details to the magisterial court.

It also noted that according to the police, Navlakha was produced before the magisterial court around 2.40 PM even as the high court's interim order was issued at around 2.30 PM.

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)