The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted bail to Assam MLA Akhil Gogoi in a case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act for his alleged role in violent anti-Citizenship (Amendment) Act protests in the state in December 2019, Bar and Bench reported.

A bench of Justices V Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal, however, upheld a Gauhati High Court order that had set aside the peasant leader’s discharge in the case.

In February, the High Court had told a National Investigation Agency court to conduct a fresh hearing on the framing of charges against the Sibsagar MLA as well as three of his associates named Dhirjya Konwar, Manas Konwar and Bittu Sonowal.

In 2021, the investigating agency had challenged an order of a special National Investigation Agency court discharging Gogoi from the case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

Besides UAPA, Gogoi was booked under Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy), 124A (sedition), 153A (promoting enmity between different communities), and 153B (making imputations and assertions prejudicial to national integration) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The MLA had approached the Supreme Court against the High Court decision. The Supreme Court bench sought the response of the National Investigation Agency on whether protection from arrest granted to Gogoi should continue till the trial is over.

Hearings in the case

During the hearings, senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, representing Gogoi, had told the Supreme Court that were no allegations of his client abusing his liberties while out on bail following the discharge order.

But Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the central agency, had alleged that Gogoi was the kingpin of a network of Maoist sympathisers and supporters.

“Elected representatives cannot simultaneously be terrorists,” the solicitor general had said. “Gogoi was associated with the proscribed organisation Communist Party of India (Maoist). He sent [his organisation] Krishak Mukti Sangram Samiti cadres to train in Maoist camps, orchestrated widespread blockades in Assam, virtually paralysing the government machinery, and even provoked angry mobs to cause damage to public property.”

The investigating agency had also argued in the High Court that Gogoi and the three others conspired to incite hatred and disaffection towards the government by using the Citizenship Amendment Act as a pretext. The legislation gave undocumented migrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan a chance to apply for Indian citizenship – as long as they were not Muslim.

In its order, passed on July 1, 2021, the special court had noted that from his speeches available on record, Gogoi cannot be accused of any incitement to violence.

“Protests in a democracy are sometimes seen to take the form of blockades and even causing inconvenience to citizens,” the special court had noted. “However, it is doubtful whether such blockades for temporary periods, if unaccompanied by any incitement to violence, would constitute a terrorist act within the meaning of Section 15 of the UA(P) Act. This is beyond the intention of the legislature. There can be other laws to address that.”

Also read: In Assam, a peasant leader charged with sedition has given both Congress and BJP cause for worry