By PTI
MUMBAI: The Supreme Court order allowing jailed activist Gautam Navlakha to be stored beneath home arrest for a month has dropped at the fore a number of purposes filed by the accused within the Elgar Parishad-Maoist hyperlinks case lamenting lack of services in jail and denial of entry to the identical.
Besides searching for medical remedy, the accused within the case have repeatedly approached courts for permission to get books, chairs, consuming straws, spectacles and mosquito nets contained in the jail have requested courts for.
In November 2020, accused Stan Swamy had filed an utility earlier than a particular court docket right here searching for straw and sipper on the Taloja jail in Navi Mumbai the place he’s lodged.
In his plea, Swamy had mentioned the National Investigation Agency (NIA) seized it from him and he was unable to raise a glass as a result of Parkinson’s illness.
The NIA, in its reply, nonetheless, mentioned it had not seized any straw and sipper glass from Swamy.
Later, jail authorities supplied him with a straw and sipper.
Swamy died in July 2021 at a non-public hospital right here whereas he was in judicial custody.
In December 2020, Navlakha’s accomplice Sahba Husain mentioned the previous’s spectacles have been stolen in jail and when his household despatched him a brand new pair, the jail authorities refused to simply accept them.
The excessive court docket had later criticised the jail authorities and mentioned all these are human issues.
The jail authorities later accepted the pair of spectacles despatched by Navlakha’s household.
READ HERE | Relief for Bhima Koregaon accused Gautam Navlakha as SC paves approach for home arrest
In 2020, lawyer-activist Sudha Bharadwaj had filed an utility earlier than the particular court docket claiming she was not being allowed entry to books.
She mentioned when books have been despatched for her, the Superintendent at Mumbai’s Byculla Jail, the place she was lodged, had refused to obtain them for her.
The particular court docket had allowed her plea to have entry to 5 books per 30 days from exterior jail, whereas directing the jail superintendent to “carefully examine” the books to make sure they didn’t comprise any “objectionable material”.
The court docket had additionally mentioned past the prescribed parameters to deem a e book’s content material “objectionable”, together with whether or not it’s vulgar, obscene or preaches violence, a superintendent didn’t have powers to withhold a e book from a detainee.
In April this 12 months, Navlakha’s lawyer Yug Chaudhary had knowledgeable the Bombay High Court that jail authorities had refused handy over a e book by English writer P G Wodehouse.
During the arguments within the excessive court docket on Navlakha’s plea searching for to be stored beneath home arrest, Chaudhary had mentioned the situation of the jail was very poor.
The HC had then mentioned the jail authorities’ motion refusing Wodehouse’s e book was comical.
Navlakha and co-accused Sagar Gorkhe had filed purposes within the particular court docket searching for permission to have mosquito nets contained in the jail.
This was opposed by Taloja jail authorities citing safety considerations.
ALSO READ | Bhima Koregaon case: Pune cop planted proof in gadgets of jailed activists, says report
The court docket didn’t enable the pleas of Navlakha and Gorkhe, however directed the jail superintendent to take “all necessary precautions against mosquitoes, conduct fumigation, allow inmates to use repellents, ointments and incense sticks”.
Navlakha had additionally filed one other utility within the particular court docket searching for permission to make cellphone/video calls to his kin.
The jail authorities had contended that the ability began in the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, however couldn’t be permitted to undertrials regularly.
The court docket rejected Navlakha’s plea, following which he filed an attraction within the excessive court docket.
Surendra Gadling, one other accused within the case, had filed an utility searching for a chair and desk citing medical illnesses, claiming he was unable to squat on the ground for lengthy with out growing ache in his again and neck.
ALSO READ | SC grants bail to Bhima Koregaon case accused Varavara Rao on medical grounds
Gadling had mentioned he wanted the desk and chair as he needed to examine lots since he was representing himself within the case.
Prison authorities had opposed this plea as properly citing safety dangers.
The court docket agreed with Gadling’s competition, observing that the allegations he has to defend himself towards are critical and there are a lot of paperwork he wants to review for hours collectively.
Gadling was allowed a chair and desk at his price.
Gadling had additionally sought permission to have his personal shaving equipment, which was opposed by the jail authorities.
The court docket agreed with the jail authorities that it will pose hazard and rejected the appliance.
MUMBAI: The Supreme Court order allowing jailed activist Gautam Navlakha to be stored beneath home arrest for a month has dropped at the fore a number of purposes filed by the accused within the Elgar Parishad-Maoist hyperlinks case lamenting lack of services in jail and denial of entry to the identical.
Besides searching for medical remedy, the accused within the case have repeatedly approached courts for permission to get books, chairs, consuming straws, spectacles and mosquito nets contained in the jail have requested courts for.
In November 2020, accused Stan Swamy had filed an utility earlier than a particular court docket right here searching for straw and sipper on the Taloja jail in Navi Mumbai the place he’s lodged.
In his plea, Swamy had mentioned the National Investigation Agency (NIA) seized it from him and he was unable to raise a glass as a result of Parkinson’s illness.
The NIA, in its reply, nonetheless, mentioned it had not seized any straw and sipper glass from Swamy.
Later, jail authorities supplied him with a straw and sipper.
Swamy died in July 2021 at a non-public hospital right here whereas he was in judicial custody.
In December 2020, Navlakha’s accomplice Sahba Husain mentioned the previous’s spectacles have been stolen in jail and when his household despatched him a brand new pair, the jail authorities refused to simply accept them.
The excessive court docket had later criticised the jail authorities and mentioned all these are human issues.
The jail authorities later accepted the pair of spectacles despatched by Navlakha’s household.
READ HERE | Relief for Bhima Koregaon accused Gautam Navlakha as SC paves approach for home arrest
In 2020, lawyer-activist Sudha Bharadwaj had filed an utility earlier than the particular court docket claiming she was not being allowed entry to books.
She mentioned when books have been despatched for her, the Superintendent at Mumbai’s Byculla Jail, the place she was lodged, had refused to obtain them for her.
The particular court docket had allowed her plea to have entry to 5 books per 30 days from exterior jail, whereas directing the jail superintendent to “carefully examine” the books to make sure they didn’t comprise any “objectionable material”.
The court docket had additionally mentioned past the prescribed parameters to deem a e book’s content material “objectionable”, together with whether or not it’s vulgar, obscene or preaches violence, a superintendent didn’t have powers to withhold a e book from a detainee.
In April this 12 months, Navlakha’s lawyer Yug Chaudhary had knowledgeable the Bombay High Court that jail authorities had refused handy over a e book by English writer P G Wodehouse.
During the arguments within the excessive court docket on Navlakha’s plea searching for to be stored beneath home arrest, Chaudhary had mentioned the situation of the jail was very poor.
The HC had then mentioned the jail authorities’ motion refusing Wodehouse’s e book was comical.
Navlakha and co-accused Sagar Gorkhe had filed purposes within the particular court docket searching for permission to have mosquito nets contained in the jail.
This was opposed by Taloja jail authorities citing safety considerations.
ALSO READ | Bhima Koregaon case: Pune cop planted proof in gadgets of jailed activists, says report
The court docket didn’t enable the pleas of Navlakha and Gorkhe, however directed the jail superintendent to take “all necessary precautions against mosquitoes, conduct fumigation, allow inmates to use repellents, ointments and incense sticks”.
Navlakha had additionally filed one other utility within the particular court docket searching for permission to make cellphone/video calls to his kin.
The jail authorities had contended that the ability began in the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, however couldn’t be permitted to undertrials regularly.
The court docket rejected Navlakha’s plea, following which he filed an attraction within the excessive court docket.
Surendra Gadling, one other accused within the case, had filed an utility searching for a chair and desk citing medical illnesses, claiming he was unable to squat on the ground for lengthy with out growing ache in his again and neck.
ALSO READ | SC grants bail to Bhima Koregaon case accused Varavara Rao on medical grounds
Gadling had mentioned he wanted the desk and chair as he needed to examine lots since he was representing himself within the case.
Prison authorities had opposed this plea as properly citing safety dangers.
The court docket agreed with Gadling’s competition, observing that the allegations he has to defend himself towards are critical and there are a lot of paperwork he wants to review for hours collectively.
Gadling was allowed a chair and desk at his price.
Gadling had additionally sought permission to have his personal shaving equipment, which was opposed by the jail authorities.
The court docket agreed with the jail authorities that it will pose hazard and rejected the appliance.