2019 Gadchiroli blast: Evidence against alleged Naxal operative justified to frame charges, says HC

Mumbai, Aug 8 (PTI) Evidence submitted against alleged Naxal operative Satyanarayana Rani in connection with the 2019 Gadchiroli blast case that killed 15 police personnel and one civilian, justified framing of the charge, the Bombay High Court said while refusing to discharge him.

A division bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande had on July 10 dismissed 73-year-old Rani’s appeal challenging a special court order of August 2021, refusing to discharge him from the case.

The high court, in its order, said it cannot find any infirmity with the special court order refusing to discharge Rani from the case as witness statements and other evidence “cumulatively amounts to a grave suspicion of his association with the CPI (M)”.

The high court’s order copy dismissing Rani’s appeal was made available on Thursday.

The bench in its order said the chargesheet filed in the case would reveal that the accused persons, including Rani, were members of a banned organisation – CPI (M), and conspired to destabilise and overthrow the government in India.

It added that perusal of evidence shows that Rani along with other co-accused was part of a larger conspiracy, which resulted into a terrorist act, and that he had attended a meeting where conspiracy was hatched to ambush the security forces and avenge the killing of 40 Naxals.

“The evidence (against Rani) justified framing of charge,” the HC said.

Rani and other co-accused are accused of killing police personnel, it said.

The high court noted that at the stage of discharge, the role of the judge is to sift through the evidence in order to find out whether there is sufficient ground to proceed against the accused.

“At this stage, the probative value of the material cannot be gone into and the said material brought on record has to be accepted as true,” the HC said.

The court noted that at the time of framing of charges, the foremost principle is that the probative value of the material need not be gone into and the material brought on record by the prosecution has to be accepted as true.

“There must exist some material for entertaining a strong suspicion, which can form the basis for drawing of the charge and refusal to discharge the accused,” the bench said.

The trial court judge has to merely sift the evidence placed before him in order to find out whether or not, there exist sufficient ground for proceeding to frame charges against the accused, the high court said.

“It is equally well settled that the defence of the accused is not to be looked into at the stage, when the accused seek discharge, which contemplate that the record of the case ‘is to be perused’, which is understood to cover the documents and evidence if any, produced by the prosecution,” the HC said.

It added that the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) does not give any right to the accused to produce any document at the stage of framing of the charge, and the submission of the accused is to be confined to the material produced by the police.

While the high court dismissed Rani’s plea for discharge, it allowed another petition filed by him challenging an order passed by the special court allowing the prosecution to submit statements of certain witnesses as additional evidence in the case after filing of its chargesheet and supplementary chargesheet.

The bench said the statements recorded by an investigating officer in another case was sought to be introduced in the present case without filing a supplementary charge-sheet and the special court accepted the same.

“The above procedure adopted is completely unknown to law,” the high court said, quashing the special court order permitting the prosecution to submit the additional evidence.

Rani was granted bail by the high court in the case in July 2022.

On May 1, 2019, an IED blast targeted a vehicle carrying members of the Maharashtra police’s Quick Response Team (QRT), killing 15 police personnel.

Rani was arrested in June 2019 from Hyderabad and was accused of being an alleged Naxal operative and also for being part of the blast conspiracy.

The case is being probed by the National Investigation Agency (NIA).

Rani has been booked under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and the Explosive Substances Act.