MUMBAI: Observing that only four of the intended 417 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far in a 2018 Nalasopara Arms haul terror-plot case, the Bombay high court recently granted bail to a prime accused Vaibhav Raut, an alleged Sanatan Sanstha member.
The prosecution said the Sanstha's various accused persons, including Raut allegedly "collected or prepared crude bombs and stored explosives in his house and in the godown...also conducted recce of the places where the bombs were to be planted".
The prosecution case was that "one of the aims of the members of the Sanatan Sanstha was to prevent screening of movies, holding of western cultural programmes and organisation of such events, such as the 'Sunburn' festival in Pune and other events, which according Sanatan Sanstha are perceived to be against the tenets of Hinduism, an ideology followed by the Sanatan Sanstha."
The Maharashtra Anti-Terror Squad had booked 12 persons for terror acts under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and other offences and found eight crude bombs in his house and 12 in his alleged godown and said Raut, an active member of Sanatan Sanstha, was part of a conspiracy to destabilize India and destroy the country’s sovereignty and integrity.
The HC bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Gauri Godse observed that Raut has been in custody for the last five years and observed that the minimum punishment possible under UAPA for the offence was five years with maximum extending to life imprisonment. The trial is likely to take time and three co-accused -- Pratap Hajra, Liladhar Lodhi and Avinash Pawar were already granted bail, Pawar, by the Supreme Court, the HC said.
The HC after hearing Raut’s lawyer Sana Raees Khan and additional public prosecutor K V Saste said, "it is also pertinent to note that…the crude bombs were seized prior to (his) arrest’’ and that the “godown does not stand in the name of the appellant (Raut) but stands in the name of Om Sai Developers"
The prosecutor said Raut had paid the developer for its purchase though there was no document evidencing it.
The prosecution said a diary was recovered from a garage at Raut’s with entries of the plan to prepare crude bombs.
The HC said the “prosecution has not been able to show that the contents of the diary are corroborated by any other statements of any witnesses or any other document on record’’
Khan argued for bail on the ground in part, on merits and on the ground of long incarceration of Raut. She submits that co-accused Avinash Anant Pawar @ Ajit Dada has been granted bail by the Apex Court by order dated 11th August 2022, on the ground, that he dad suffered incarceration for about 4 years and there is no likelihood of an early conclusion of his trial. She also had submitted that the other two were on 23rd March 2023 been granted bail by the HC while Raut has been behind bars for more than 5 years with no prospect of his trial completing in the immediate future. On merits, she argued “although, there is recovery of 8 crude bombs from the house of the appellant, the said house does not stand in the name of the appellant, nor are the bombs recovered under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act."
The APP said a diary recovered with notations in Raut’s handwriting gave a list of bomb preparation. Khan said the contents of the alleged diary which is in Raut’s handwriting, recovered from the garage, have not been corroborated by any witness.
The HC took on record Raut’s affidavit-cum-undertaking not to leave Mumbai or Vasai and Virar jurisdiction sans prior court nod , not to tamper with witnesses or evidence and not to delay the trial. The HC quashed a December 2022 rejection order of the special trial and ordered his release on bail on a PR bond of Rs 50000 with a surety in like amount.
The conditions imposed on Raut include that he "shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses/evidence’’ and “shall appear before the Trial Court on every date and will not seek any adjournment". He shall not leave the jurisdiction of Mumbai and Vasai-Virar, District-Palghar without the prior permission of the Trial Court and submit an undertaking before the Trial Court within two weeks of his release to comply with all the aforesaid conditions. The HC clarified that the its observations are prima facie in nature and the special Trial Judge to conduct the trial on its own merits, uninfluenced by its order.
