New Delhi: The Supreme Court Friday granted interim bail to social activist Teesta Setalvad, who was arrested more than two months ago on charges of forgery and fabrication of evidence in the 2002 Gujarat riots cases.
A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice UU Lalit directed the Gujarat Police on Saturday to produce Setalvad in a local court in Ahmedabad to formalize his release subject to bail conditions.
“Having taken into account all relevant aspects of the case, the appellant is entitled to the relief of interim bail,” the Supreme Court ordered.
The court accepted Setalvad’s request and asked the trial court to take cash bail from him in the form of bail instead of insisting on local bail. The court clarified that it would be open to the trial court to determine the conditions of interim bail.
Without going into the rival disputes given by both the parties – Setalvad and the Gujarat government – the bench said the social worker was entitled to interim bail considering certain aspects of the matter. It also said that the relief was in view of the peculiar facts of the case, in which Setalvad is a woman.
The top court clarified that as far as Setalvad’s regular bail is concerned, the Gujarat High Court, where his bail plea is still pending, will take the final decision. The court said it has considered the matter “from the point of view of interim bail” and “has not touched the merits of submission”.
The court noted in its order, “On merits the entire matter shall be considered by the HC independently and unaffected by the observations made in the order by this court.”
It cited Friday’s order to cite other accused persons in the case as precedents in their bail pleas, as and when they are filed. The order, it clarified, “will not be taken as a reflection and will not be used by the other accused and whenever there is an opportunity” and the court will consider their case “on the whole of merit”.
Till the HC decides on Setalvad’s plea, his passport will be kept in the custody of the trial court in Ahmedabad, where his case is pending, the SC further said, directing to “tender full cooperation in the pending investigation”.
Arrested on June 25, Setalvad has been charged with forging, forging and fabricated evidence in the Gujarat riots cases and trying to implicate innocent people. there was an FIR Lodged On June 25, a day after the Supreme Court dismissed a petition filed by Setalvad against Setalvad, challenging the clean chit given to rioting Congress MP Ehsan Jafri’s widow Zakia Jafri and the then Chief Minister of Gujarat and now the Prime Minister Afterwards. Narendra Modi and other high-ranking officials of the state are involved in the alleged larger conspiracy behind the 2002 riots.
Setalvad had approached the Supreme Court on August 2 after the Gujarat HC issued notice on his appeal challenging the July 30 order of the Ahmedabad trial court, which had rejected his bail. However, the HC had turned down his plea for interim bail till a decision on his regular bail plea was taken. Further, it adjourned the matter for six weeks and listed the matter for hearing on September 19.
read also, Strong case made against Teesta Setalvad for serious offences: Gujarat govt to SC
case lasted for two days
Aggrieved by the prolonged adjournment, Setalvad filed a petition in the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution, which empowers the apex court to consider a petition filed against any judgment, decree or order passed by any court in the country. gives. In this, he had questioned the order of the lower court as well as the decision of the HC to deny him interim bail.
There was a long debate on this matter for two days. The top court on Thursday asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the state, to explain whether giving a longer date to the Gujarat HC is an ideal. In response, Mehta on Friday denied the claims that the HC had done injustice to Setalvad and that the judge had followed a similar practice.
He then produced before the bench the statements of witnesses – two handed over to the police, two recorded before the magistrate – to assert his point that Setalvad was part of a larger conspiracy to defame the state.
Mehta accused Setalvad of portraying Gujarat as a “rape state” and claimed that he had refused to cooperate with the police during his seven-day custody with investigators.
“She’s a wise man, she refused to answer,” he said, adding in the same vein, “she deserves to be silent, it’s her right.”
According to him, the investigation was at a critical stage and in the process of ascertaining how the conspiracy was hatched and who were part of it.
Mehta urged the bench not to “set a bad precedent” by considering Setalvad’s plea, especially since his regular bail plea is still pending before the state high court.
‘HC should have considered the petition’
Setalvad’s counsel, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, rejected the charges leveled against his client and said the state has made him its “worst enemy”.
Sibal questioned the state’s action on the alleged incidents, saying, “This is harassment and not prosecution.”
According to him, the affidavits, which were forged by the state, were given to the SC in support of a petition by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), which was transferred to a court-appointed SIT in riots cases.
After considering the submissions, the counterarguments and “certain important aspects of the case”, the SC held that Setalvad was entitled to interim relief of bail.
“In our view, the HC should have considered the prayer for release on interim bail during the pendency of the case,” the court said.
The aspects that favored Setalvad were that she was in police custody for seven days, was in jail for more than two months and the alleged offenses pertained to the period of 2002, or at best till 2012 when the SIT took all its The investigation was completed.
“The essential element of the investigation, in which the custodial interrogation has been completed, has assumed a complex form in the matter, where the relief of interim bail was clearly made till the matter is considered by the HC,” it said.