SC expunges HC criticism of NIA in Navlakha case

NEW DELHI : The Supreme Court expunged on Monday scathing criticism of the National Investigation Agency (NIA) by the Delhi high court in connection with the bail application of Gautam Navlakha and set aside the high court’s order asking to examine documents used to transfer the jailed activist from Delhi to Mumbai last month.

A bench of justices Arun Mishra and Navin Sinha said only courts in Mumbai, and not the Delhi high court, have the jurisdiction to decide Navlakha’s bail plea. The 67-year-old activist is currently in Mumbai’s Taloja jail facing charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act for their alleged links with banned Maoist outfits.

“The entire exercise taken by the high court of Delhi was totally uncalled for…..it was the jurisdiction of the Bombay court alone to entertain any application (of bail). The high court of Delhi should not have entertained the application at the threshold, the observations made are hereby ordered to be expunged,” the bench said in its order.

“Since the respondent (Navlakha) has been moved to Bombay, he is at liberty to apply before the competent court in Bombay,” the order added.

Navlakha, along with nine other activists, is wanted in connection with the violence that broke out in Maharashtra’s Bhima Koregaon village on January 1, 2018. Police say the activists had Maoist links and fuelled clashes by giving inflammatory speeches at an event called Elgar Parishad held on December 31, 2017. Navlakha surrendered on April 14, after the top court’s order to the effect on April 8, and was taken to Mumbai by train on May 26. On May 27, the Delhi high court pulled up the NIA for taking away Navlakha from Tihar Jail to Mumbai even when his interim bail plea was pending here. Justice Anup Bhambhani had noted there was an “evident haste” shown by the NIA in moving pleas across Mumbai and Delhi over weekends and Gazetted holidays (Eid) and obtaining orders by e-mail, and “whisking away” Navlakha to Mumbai. The HC also sought to examine the documents produced by the agency in support of its production warrant from a special judge in Mumbai.