On March 5, the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court set aside the conviction of former Delhi University professor GN Saibaba and five others, saying the prosecution had failed to prove its case.
Saibaba had been convicted under the UAPA in 2017 for purported Maoist links. He was sentenced to life imprisonment. In 2022, the Bombay High Court had acquitted him in the case but the Supreme Court stayed the verdict and asked that the case be heard afresh.
In its editorial this morning, The Hindu said the exoneration “exposes the practice of invoking stringent laws based on nothing more than a person’s likely association with or sympathy for extremist groups”. It also spotlighted the “bail-denying features” of the UAPA which allowed long years of imprisonment “even though the evidence backing their arrest is doubtful or flimsy”.
“The latest judgement is a complete repudiation of the prosecution case, holding that the seizure effected from the accused was not proved, the material relied upon by the state was inadequate and that there was nothing to link the accused with any terrorist act, conspiracy or membership of any Maoist organisation,” the editorial said.
The Times of India also had an editorial on the matter on March 6. Headlined “Not anti, only notional”, it said the acquittals were “no real surprise” – that it “took 10 years is the sad part”. It pointed out that crimes under UAPA went up by 23 percent between 2021 and 2022 but “investigations and hearings drag while undertrials are behind bars”.
“Acquitting Saibaba and others yesterday, the court said, ‘prosecution’s failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt their case’. That’s the message. Securing the nation needs both going by the book and better identification of risk. Otherwise, later if not sooner, it’s investigators who’ll have to do the explaining,” it said.
Hindustan Times trod the same path in its editorial, saying the case raises “several questions about investigations in Maoist/terror cases, the treatment of undertrials, and provisions of UAPA itself”.
“A parallel can be drawn with the Elgar Parishad case, where the police claimed there was an elaborate conspiracy to overthrow the Indian State by a diverse set of political actors including Dalit groups, Left-wing activists, academicians, and Maoists...More often than not, trials in such cases extend for years, and, as the Supreme Court recently suggested, the process itself becomes the punishment,” it said.
The editorial noted that there’s been an “alarming increase” in cases registered under the UAPA while conviction rates are “abysmal”. “This suggests a shoddy investigation, and the hasty invocation of anti-terror law provisions, often resulting in a miscarriage of justice.”
Newslaundry had previously interviewed Saibaba’s wife, who said her husband was being subjected to a “witch-hunt” and that the central government was trying to muzzle any voice that counters its political narrative. Watch the interview here.
In times of misinformation, you need news you can trust. We’ve got you covered. Subscribe to Newslaundry and power our work.
General elections are around the corner, and Newslaundry and The News Minute have ambitious plans together. Choose an election project you would like to support and power our journalism. Click here.
Newslaundry is a reader-supported, ad-free, independent news outlet based out of New Delhi. Support their journalism, here.
