Can call for revolution be dubbed an offence? SC asks Govt

"A large number of material and news come to us. Similarly, such material come to you and this person also. If that is his ideology and he says revolution is the only way to reform society, can we say that is an offence"? a vacation bench of justices G S Singhvi and C K Prasad said.

The apex court made the remarks after senior counsel U U Lalit, appearing for Chhattisgarh government, opposed the bail on ground that Guha was an active sympathiser of Maoists and there were a large number of material and pamphlets to link him to the banned organisation.

The bench said mere possession of certain material cannot be a ground for convicting a person.

"Apart from these documents, are there any other material? Possession of papers is not an offence. We can't go on the basis of mere surmises and conjectures", the bench said.
Lalit submitted the state had material to show that Guha, besides being a Maoist sympathiser, had eulogised the killing of policemen by Naxalites and was also an accused in the Purulia arms drop case in West Bengal.

Lalit said the state had seized pamphlets to prove that Maoists had said that Guha had done a "commendable job" for the organisation.

"It is very difficult to give a definite meaning to the word commendable. It is said in different context and perspective. Also, it differs in meaning from person to person.
Courts cannot convict a person unless there is evidence. Except possession of material, there is no other evidence," the bench said while proceeding to grant bail to Guha.

"Although this court does not interfere in the grant of bail when co-accused Binayak Sen has been granted bail by this court, the sentence imposed by the trial court is suspended. Petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing Rs two lakh with two sureties of Rs one lakh each", the bench said in its order.

Guha, a Kolkata-based businessman, was convicted along with Sen and Naxal ideologue Narayan Sanyal for colluding with Maoists to establish a network to fight the state. They were awarded life imprisonment.

He then challenged his conviction in the Chhattisgarh High Court which refused to grant him bail in the case.

The apex court had on May 24 issued a notice to the state government and had asked it to file its response by today.

Challenging the order of the Chhattisgarh High Court, advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for Guha, had pleaded with the court to grant bail saying he has already spent four years in jail.

He had also pointed out that the apex court had recently granted bail to Sen.
The apex court had granted bail to 61-year-old Sen on April 15 while questioning his conviction and life sentence for sedition, saying he could be a sympathiser of Naxalites and nothing beyond that.

"No case of sedition is made out," the apex court had said.
The conviction and life imprisonment of Sen, along with Guha and Sanyal, had led to outrage in many quarters, including international human rights bodies which had sought government's permission to observe the court proceedings in the case.