A Mumbai sessions court has refused anticipatory bail to two students of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) in a case linked to slogans demanding the release of activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, while granting protection from arrest to seven other accused.
Additional Sessions Judge VB Bohra passed the orders on August 7 in a case initially registered at Trombay police station and later transferred to the Crime Investigation Department (CID).
The case stems from an incident in which around 10 to 12 students allegedly gathered near a hostel without permission from the TISS administration. The gathering included a candlelight tribute to late human rights activist GN Saibaba, readings from his poems and slogans seeking the release of Khalid and Imam.
The court noted that Saibaba had been acquitted by the Bombay High Court in a terror case before his death and said that merely paying tribute to him could not, by itself, be treated as an unlawful act.
The court, however, found the cases of students Kamakhya Das and Abhirup Paul different because of material allegedly recovered during the investigation.
In Das’s case, investigators allegedly found books attributed to members of the CPI (Maoist) downloaded on electronic devices. The prosecution also alleged that some information had been deleted and that Das had not fully cooperated with the investigation. An allegation of threatening a police officer was also placed before the court.
The judge said the material recovered raised questions about Das’s conduct and warranted further investigation into the purpose behind downloading the books and the alleged slogans. The court held that custodial interrogation was required to establish her intentions and possible involvement in the alleged offences.
Similar concerns were raised in Paul’s case. Investigators allegedly found Maoist-related books on his phone along with WhatsApp conversations indicating that he had visited different locations for fieldwork. The prosecution also alleged that some information had been deleted from his device.
The court said these circumstances raised a possibility that Paul had been influenced by Maoist ideology. At the same time, it made clear that simply downloading books published by a Maoist organisation would not, on its own, constitute a criminal offence.
The court also considered allegations concerning Paul’s association with the Progressive Students Forum. According to the prosecution, the group had used social media to put pressure on the complainant, while a prosecution witness was allegedly threatened.
Against this backdrop, the judge concluded that Paul’s custodial interrogation was necessary to determine his intentions and whether he had any connection with a banned organisation.
The court took a different view of the remaining seven accused — Uttkarsh Khuntia, Yash Kaundilya, Avantika, Ishpreet Kaur, Nikita Monica Dsouza, Hardika Bhagat and Satyam Yadav — and granted them anticipatory bail.
For these students, the allegations largely concerned their presence at the gathering, raising slogans or reading a poem. The court noted that no incriminating material had been recovered from them and that they had cooperated with investigators.
While dealing with the slogans concerning Khalid and Imam, the court also referred to the Supreme Court’s orders in the Delhi riots case involving the two and observed that students are expected to respect the law.
The seven students were directed to furnish personal bonds of ₹25,000 each along with one surety. They must cooperate with the CID, avoid influencing witnesses and seek permission from the trial court before travelling outside India.
The court also reiterated the established principle that bail is the rule and jail is an exception.
