Colin Gonsalves: Refusal of bail to Sudha Bharadwaj is based on inadmissible evidence
NB: Mrs Indira Gandhi's Emergency lasted 21 months; the NDA government controlled by the so-called Sangh Parivar is installing a permanent ideological tyranny in front of our noses. This is an undeclared Emergency. Those who refuse to speak out despite all evidence, are collaborators in the Sangh's project to destroy Indian democracy. As for the judges who allow this to happen, the less said the better. May God have mercy on their souls. Do read the citation from Franz Neumann below on the role of the judiciary in fostering Nazism. DS
Refusal of bail to Sudha Bharadwaj is based on inadmissible evidence
Sudha Bharadwaj, professor of Law at the National Law University Delhi, a former member of the Chhattisgarh State Legal Services Authority and founder of the democratic rights organisation Janhit, has been in jail for two years following the rejection of her bail application. The high court order followed a recent two-judge bench Supreme Court decision in Zahoor Watali’s case, where the Court held that bail under section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) can be denied by relying upon prosecution documents even though they would be inadmissible in evidence during the trial.
Refusal of bail to Sudha Bharadwaj is based on inadmissible evidence
Sudha Bharadwaj, professor of Law at the National Law University Delhi, a former member of the Chhattisgarh State Legal Services Authority and founder of the democratic rights organisation Janhit, has been in jail for two years following the rejection of her bail application. The high court order followed a recent two-judge bench Supreme Court decision in Zahoor Watali’s case, where the Court held that bail under section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) can be denied by relying upon prosecution documents even though they would be inadmissible in evidence during the trial.
Such a judgment is
unprecedented and has draconian consequences. Like Bharadwaj, there are several
leftist comrades in jail today whose only crime is that they fearlessly opposed
governments in courts while defending their clients. Yug Chaudhary, who
brilliantly defends Bharadwaj in the Court, pointed out that the only evidence
against her was letters and documents recovered from other accused.
Nothing
objectionable was recovered from her or her devices. No witness statements were
recorded by the police. None of the documents was signed by any of the accused
persons. The authorship is not known. They do not bear any date. If produced in
court during the trial, they would not be accepted as admissible evidence. The
investigation is over and this is all that the police have. Meanwhile,
Bharadwaj has developed osteoarthritis and is in great pain. She lost her
father while in custody and is the sole guardian of her young daughter....
https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/sudha-bharadwaj-bail-rejection-uapa-6513800/
NB: Here's an interesting citation from an important book on Nazism written in the 1930’s:
Franz Neumann, Behemoth, The Structure and Practice of National Socialism; (repub 1963, p 27). A pdf file may be read here:
(The counter revolution) ‘…tried many forms and devices, but soon learned that it could come to power only with the help of the state machine and never against it… the Kapp Putsch of 1920 and the Hitler Pustch of 1923 had proved this.. In the centre of the counter revolution stood the judiciary. Unlike administrative acts, which rest on considerations of convenience and expediency, judicial decisions rest on law, that is on right and wrong, and they always enjoy the limelight of publicity. Law is perhaps the most pernicious of all weapons in political struggles, precisely because of the halo that surrounds the concepts of right and justice…
‘Right’, Hocking has said, ‘is psychologically a claim whose infringement is met with a resentment deeper than the injury would satisfy, a resentment that may amount to passion for which men will risk life and property as they would never do for an expediency’. When it becomes ‘political’, justice breeds hatred and despair among those it singles out for attack. Those whom it favours, on the other hand, develop a profound contempt for the very value of justice, they know that it can be purchased by the powerful. As a device for strengthening one political group at the expense of others, for eliminating enemies and assisting political allies, law then threatens the fundamental convictions upon which the tradition of our civilization rests… DS
India: End Bias in Prosecuting Delhi Violence
