Gauhati High Court: Ajai Lamba, CJ. while considering a bail application of Akhil Gogoi who was in custody on the allegations of conspiring and committing acts with intent to facilitate design to wage war against the State by means of using passage of Citizenship Amendment bill in Parliament as a cause, held that,
“no actionable evidence or material has been pointed out which would conclude that applicant and other accused waged war against the State.
Present proceedings took place in a virtual court in view of the COVID-19 outbreak.
Akhil Gogoi had filed the present application for bail under Section 439 CrPC, 1973 under Section 120(B)/122/123/143/147/148/149/150/152/ 153/326/333/353 of Penal Code, 1860.
It has been alleged that accused persons used Citizenship Amendment Bill as an opportunity to abet, incite unlawful assemblies with deadly weapons at various placed and abetted extreme violence.
They all connived, engaged and promoted the engagement of persons to become members of unlawful assembly at various placed in Assam. It was a full-fledged conspiracy secretly hatched by the accused along with some other unknown persons.
Adding to the above allegations, it has been alleged that in pursuance to unlawful common abject to assault and voluntarily cause grievous hurt to public servants by deadly weapons and inflammable substances likely to cause death, conspiracy was hatched.
Accused himself admitted that he took part in the protest rallies. It has been brought out that by taking part in these rallies he instigated common citizens, which is an act of criminal design to wage war against the State.
People were provoked which created enmity between various communities on the ground of religion, race, residence, etc., which is prejudicial to maintenance of harmony — waging war against the State.
High Court
Court noted that attention of the Court towards any actionable evidence or material that would indicate waging of war against the State has not be drawn.
Adding to the above, bench asked the question as to under what circumstance Investigating Agency concluded that such protest against the Bill would constitute waging war against the State?
To above position, Court stated that nothing has been pointed with regard to such protests to conclude as an attempt by the applicant and other accused to wage war against the State.
Bench held that such actions and incidents had taken place virtually all over the country and in view of that further custody of applicant shall not serve any purpose in law or any purpose of investigation.
Thus, applicant be released on bail to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate and in case at any point during investigation or trial intimidates or influences or approaches any witness of the incidents, prosecution would be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail. [Akhil Gogoi v. State of Assam, 2020 SCC OnLine Gau 1092 , decided on 26-03-2020]
Not only your contents but also the way you present the issue is awesome.