Mumbai: Bombay High Court on Tuesday directed the Maharashtra government to produce relevant records of the Pune 2018 trial court process in connection with the Chargesheet submitted in the case of Elgar Parishad against lawyers Sudha Bharadwaj.
The case is that the pune trial judge, K D Vadane, “not a designated special court judge” and therefore the demand is invalid and he has the right to the default bail under the law.
The default bail is given when the chargesheet is not submitted in the Law period – in this case, 90 days – under the criminal procedure code, unless the extension is given by the court.
At the virtual hearing on Tuesday before the SS Shinde and NJ Jujad Judician, Bharadwaj yes Chaudhry and Payoshi Roy said replies RTI by the HC Registry has revealed that Judge Vadane is a district and additional session and not appointed as a special judge by the state government below Part 22 National Investigation Agency (NIA) acts for the period January 2018 and July 2019.
HC said, “We will not allow respondents to submit a reply, because we have heard substantially.” In the answer, Nia said Bharadwwah “was produced correctly before judging Vadane and she actually returned the police allegations at first and then for Judicial custody …
and correctly rejected ” the guarantee tree.
The body opposes his petition to say the fight will leads to “absurd interpretation of the law”.
It was said that this case was originally registered only below the Indian Criminal Code (IPC), and the Long Act of Long Activities (Prevention) (UPA) was only called on May 17, 2018.
However, Bharadwaj said he was arrested On August 28, 2018, after the UPA was called.
Chaudhry surrendered that if RTI’s information was found correctly, it would not only detention Bharadwaj, but from eight accused together in the case of Parishad Elgar, it would also be considered illegal.
The state has not submitted the answer.
Part 11 of Nia Act is on the “Heart of Arguments ”, said Chaudhry.
It states that special courts will be formed by notifications and led by judges appointed by the center recommended by the Chairperson of the HC.
“It cannot be said that a special judge and judge session is the same,” he added.
Part 22 of the ACT empowered the state to form a special court for the court of violations, if someone has not been appointed.
So, said Chaudhry, there are two questions: one whether Judge Pune was appointed Under the law of Nia either by the state or center; second, does the country have referred to or not a special judge under section 22? “HC will hear this problem on July 8.