Evidence & charge similarly connected as Harry Potter and international war: Hany Babu accused tells court

Latest-News

Looking for bail in reference to the Elgar Parishad case, accused Hany Babu’s counsel advised the Bombay Excessive Courtroom that the connection between the proof and prices framed by the Nationwide Investigation Company (NIA) is identical as “Harry Potter and worldwide battle”.

The bench of Justices NM Jamdar and NR Borkar have been listening to Hany Babu’s enchantment towards the rejection of bail by trial court docket in Mumbai. Hany Babu, a Delhi College professor, was arrested by the NIA on prices of being an energetic member of the banned terror outfit Communist Occasion of India (Maoist).

The Bombay Excessive Courtroom has reserved its order on Hany Babu’s bail plea.

WHAT DID THE PROSECUTION SAY?

Whereas opposing Hany Babu’s bail, Extra Solicitor Normal Anil Singh mentioned in his ending arguments that the details and proof within the chargesheet present that Hany Babu’s acts have been outlined as terrorist actions as per the Illegal Actions (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

“The risk given by the accused within the case quantities to a terrorist act,” ASG Anil Singh mentioned.

Based on the prosecution, there have been many incriminating paperwork and e-mails which were recovered from Hany Babu’s laptop computer which discuss his involvement within the case.

Additionally Learn | Elgar Parishad accused Hany Babu member of banned CPI (M), needed to ascertain ‘janta sarkar’: NIA

“There’s nothing fallacious in what the particular choose has held whereas dismissing the bail software. The actions carried out by the accused was towards the ruling authorities. The fabric (within the chargesheet) will not be from some third get together, that is from the accused solely. That is from the laptop computer owned by them. There’s not one or two letters, there are steady communications, and all of it should be thought-about in totality. The query of bail doesn’t come up,” ASG Anil Singh submitted.

ASG Anil Singh submitted that it was a “severe crime”. “Policemen and Military males are dying and there was a plan on repeating the incident of Rajiv Gandhi assassination. In such a case, some satisfaction should be recorded within the order by court docket in regards to the involvement of the accused,” he mentioned.

WHAT DID THE DEFENCE SAY

Advocate Yug Mohit Chaudhary, showing for Hany Babu, mentioned {that a} primary precept of prison legislation is that mere ‘mens rea’ can not result in an offence except accompanied by the proscribed act, ‘actus reus’.

Advocate Chaudhary mentioned that the NIA had did not level out any ‘act’ dedicated or supported by Hany Babu which might represent an offence underneath any provision besides sections 38 and 39 of the UAPA.

Advocate Chaudhary questioned the fees underneath UAPA and requested, “The place is the motion which is required to impose these sections? You can’t be prosecuted simply because there’s a potential to trigger hurt underneath UAPA. UAPA requires that an final result must be achieved. Which terrorist final result has taken place right here? The connection between proof and the cost is identical as Harry Potter and worldwide battle. There isn’t any terrorist act. One thing has to occur, a battle has to occur, folks must die. Right here nothing has occurred.”

“Babu is charged with waging battle. The place is the waging battle till there’s an act? Possessing literature will not be waging battle. There is a gigantic gulf between the proof within the case and the cost. Bombs and explosives weren’t discovered. Even when they have been discovered, he might have been charged underneath the Explosives Act. Even then, till these are used, one can’t be charged underneath UAPA,” he additional submitted.

He pleaded that the courts mustn’t get ‘swayed’ by the submissions of Singh that policemen and armed forces males are dying in Naxal assaults. “There’s a world of distinction between waging battle as an goal and really waging a battle,” he acknowledged.

Advocate Chaudhary additionally emphasised that the proof was voluminous, which implies that trial will take a very long time. He identified that nothing about Hany Babu’s conduct until date confirmed that he would abscond if launched on bail.

“Babu was summoned for interrogation. He went, however I didn’t abscond. Earlier than arrest, his home was raided, and articles are seized. His home was once more raided after his arrest and a few extra articles have been seized. What does this imply? It implies that he didn’t destroy any proof. The principle motive for jail is absconding, however right here there is no such thing as a risk of tampering with witnesses or proof. This case is nothing however sheer frivolous and perverse,” Chaudhary concluded.

Earlier than the court docket concluded, Singh rebutted {that a} terrorist act didn’t imply that somebody was required to die.

“Ought to an incident happen, or should folks die due to some actions for it to be termed as terrorism?” He identified provisions of the UAPA, the place threatening or ‘more likely to threaten’ was additionally a punishable offence when it threatened the sovereignty of the nation.

“Definition may be very vast, and incidents needn’t occur. The chargesheet contains all the pieces. Ready for an precise incident to happen can be harmful. This argument that ‘There’s a bomb, but it surely doesn’t explode, in order that they shouldn’t be prosecuted’ will not be proper”, Singh submitted.

Additionally Learn | Elgar Parishad case accused Hany Babu to be shifted again to Taloja jail

— ENDS —

Tagged