The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed the Bengal government’s special leave petition that challenged a Calcutta High Court order granting bail to student leader Sayan Lahiri in connection with a march to Nabanna on August 27.
Lahiri was a leader of the Paschimbanga Chhatra Samaj that organised an “apolitical” march to the Bengal secretariat on August 27 to protest against the rape and murder of a junior doctor at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9.
Senior advocate Jaideep Mukherjee and the state’s standing counsel Astha Sharma assailed the high court order on the ground that there were 11 FIRs against Lahiri who had spearheaded the protest resulting in massive violence and injuries to several persons, including police personnel.
The government argued that the high court had erroneously granted bail to the accused without properly examining the facts placed before it by the investigators.
Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra represented Anjali Lahiri, mother of Sayan, and said the high court had passed a “well-reasoned” order and hence called for no interference. Luthra told the Supreme Court that Sayan was targeted out of political compulsions as he had earlier been in the ruling party of Bengal and subsequently changed his affiliation.
He said the march was taken out legitimately and the protestors had intimated police about the programme in advance and possible trouble from some vested interests.
Hence, Luthra argued, the bail was rightly granted by the high court.
Justice J.B. Pardiwala who headed the bench then passed the following order: “We are not inclined to entertain the special leave petition under Article 136 of the constitution of India. The Special Leave Petition is accordingly dismissed. Pending applications, if any stand is disposed of.”
The high court had on August 30 granted bail to Sayan on a petition filed by his mother Anjali who challenged his arrest.
The police had arrested Sayan on the charges of provoking violence and damaging government and private properties.
Aggrieved by the high court’s order, the State filed the special leave petition in the Supreme Court.
