Haldwani Violence: Uttarakhand HC Grants Default Bail to 50 Accused, Says 'Extensions Wrong'

New Delhi: The Uttarakhand high court has given default bail to 50 people arrested after protests by Muslims in Haldwani against the demolition of a madrasa in February this year turned violent.

Support Free & Independent Journalism

Good morning, we need your help!!

Since May 2015, The Wire has been committed to the truth and presenting you with journalism that is fearless, truthful, and independent. Over the years there have been many attempts to throttle our reporting by way of lawsuits, FIRs and other strong arm tactics. It is your support that has kept independent journalism and free press alive in India.

If we raise funds from 2500 readers every month we will be able to pay salaries on time and keep our lights on. What you get is fearless journalism in your corner. It is that simple.

Contributions as little as ₹ 200 a month or ₹ 2500 a year keeps us going. Think of it as a subscription to the truth. We hope you stand with us and support us.

Yes, I want to contribute

At least five people were killed and around 60 injured in police firing. This madrasa demolished by the Uttarakhand authority was located in the railway colony area where more than 4,000 families resided, as reported by The Wire. The matter of the Union government wanting the land for railway expansion was being heard by the Supreme Court when the demolition happened.

Local police had registered three first information reports and by June had arrested 84 locals over alleged involvement in the protests. Their detention was extended periodically. The Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, which makes bail very difficult to secure, was slapped on to two of the three FIRs later.

Default bail is granted when an investigation is not completed and a chargesheet is not filed within a stipulated time-period while the accused are in custody. The usual time limit under the CrPC, for serious offences, is 90 days but under UAPA this may be extended up to 180 days provided the prosecution convinces the court of the investigation done until that date, and the specific need for continued detention of the accused.

A trial court had earlier declined the accused default bail – a decision they challenged in the high court, contending that there was no reason shown by the prosecution, or noted by the trial court for continued detention of the accused, much less any specific reason as required by the law.

Justices Manoj Kumar Tiwari and Pankaj Purohit upheld the plea of the accused today and directed their release on bail upon terms to be imposed by the trial court.

Although the chargesheet in the case was eventually filed on July 6, the 90-day period for the first set of detenues expired on May 12. The high court thus held that extensions granted by the trial court on May 11 and July 1 were “wrong and unsustainable.”

The accused were represented by Senior Advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan and her team.