<p>A Bench of Justices H S Bedi and C K Prasad provided relief to the 61-year-old medical practitioner saying that the mere possession of documents relating to Naxalites could not attract the serious charge of sedition.<br /><br />“We are a democratic country. He may be a sympathiser (of Naxalites) but it did not make him guilty of sedition. He is a sympathiser. There is nothing beyond that,” Justice Bedi said.<br /><br />The court trashed the objection raised by the state government to the bail application of Sen on the ground that he was supporting the banned organisation and was not simply a sympathiser.<br /><br />“The worst can be said that he was found in possession of general documents (of Naxalites) but how can it be said that such possession would attract the charge of sedition. How can you lay the charge of sedition,” the Bench asked.<br /><br />Drawing an analogy, the court said since a person possessing Mahatma Gandhi’s autobiography cannot be called Gandhian, so having documents and pamphlets (on Naxalism) could not make any an outlawed.<br /><br />The court said the statements made by the state government did not have any relevance. The state alleged that Sen was providing logistic support and had exchanged information and material directly and indirectly with the Naxalites in Chhattisgarh, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Bihar, Jharkhand and Orissa.Many members of Sen’s family, including his wife Ilina, and rights activists were present during the hearing in the case which had drawn the attention of the international community. Arguing for Sen’s bail plea, senior advocate Ram Jethmalani contended that his conviction for sedition was untenable and illegal. He submitted that the apex court had earlier released him on bail and there was no misconduct on his part.<br /><br />Senior advocate U U Lalit, appearing for the state government, submitted that Sen’s activities were to be seen in a broader context.<br /><br />Lalit had tough time in answering several questions from the court relating to the alleged recovery of the objectionable materials from Sen’s possession inside the Chhattisgarh jail.<br /><br />Rohtagi asked the court to grant bail to Sen on certain pre-conditions just as the apex court did to Gujarat minister Amit Shah in the Sohrabuddin encounter case.</p>
<p>A Bench of Justices H S Bedi and C K Prasad provided relief to the 61-year-old medical practitioner saying that the mere possession of documents relating to Naxalites could not attract the serious charge of sedition.<br /><br />“We are a democratic country. He may be a sympathiser (of Naxalites) but it did not make him guilty of sedition. He is a sympathiser. There is nothing beyond that,” Justice Bedi said.<br /><br />The court trashed the objection raised by the state government to the bail application of Sen on the ground that he was supporting the banned organisation and was not simply a sympathiser.<br /><br />“The worst can be said that he was found in possession of general documents (of Naxalites) but how can it be said that such possession would attract the charge of sedition. How can you lay the charge of sedition,” the Bench asked.<br /><br />Drawing an analogy, the court said since a person possessing Mahatma Gandhi’s autobiography cannot be called Gandhian, so having documents and pamphlets (on Naxalism) could not make any an outlawed.<br /><br />The court said the statements made by the state government did not have any relevance. The state alleged that Sen was providing logistic support and had exchanged information and material directly and indirectly with the Naxalites in Chhattisgarh, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Bihar, Jharkhand and Orissa.Many members of Sen’s family, including his wife Ilina, and rights activists were present during the hearing in the case which had drawn the attention of the international community. Arguing for Sen’s bail plea, senior advocate Ram Jethmalani contended that his conviction for sedition was untenable and illegal. He submitted that the apex court had earlier released him on bail and there was no misconduct on his part.<br /><br />Senior advocate U U Lalit, appearing for the state government, submitted that Sen’s activities were to be seen in a broader context.<br /><br />Lalit had tough time in answering several questions from the court relating to the alleged recovery of the objectionable materials from Sen’s possession inside the Chhattisgarh jail.<br /><br />Rohtagi asked the court to grant bail to Sen on certain pre-conditions just as the apex court did to Gujarat minister Amit Shah in the Sohrabuddin encounter case.</p>
