Observing that "a death is a death" the Bombay High Court on Wednesday allowed academician Dr Anand Teltumbde to meet his aged mother in Chandrapur district of Maharashtra as she has become alone after his younger brother's death. The HC has allowed Teltumbde, the prime accused in the Bhima-Koregaon violence case, to meet his mother for two days.
A division bench of Justices Sunil Shukre and Govind Sanap has ordered the jail authorities to provide police escort for Teltumbde on March 8 and 10.
Notably, Teltumbde had approached the bench in December 2021, a month after his younger brother Milind Teltumbde was shot down Garchiroli district by the police.
Special prosecutor for NIA, advocate Sandesh Patil pointed out before the bench that Milind was an alleged member of the Communist Party of India (Maoist) and was killed in an encounter in Gadchiroli district on November 13.
"He (Milind) was a wanted accused and was killed in an ambush. Please consider this aspect," Patil urged the bench.
At this, Justice Shukre responded, "A death is a death. He may be an accused, he (Milind) may have been involved in certain activities, but then ultimately he was the brother of the applicant (Anand)."
"There has been a loss of human life," the judge added.
Accordingly, the bench allowed Teltumbde to visit his mother.
It may not be out of place to mention that after his brother's demise, Teltumbde had applied for 15 days temporary bail before the special court to live with his mother. He had stated that at the time of this bereavement, he should be allowed to spend time with his mother and other relatives.
However, the special court denied him any relief after which he had petitioned the HC bench led by Justice Shukre.
Meanwhile, the bench led by Justice Shukre has also issued a notice to Attorney General of India K K Venugopal to assist the court on Teltumbde's plea challenging the provisions of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA).
Notably, the academician has taken exception to the provisions of the UAPA law which provides for an embargo on granting bail to an accused held under the law. He has challenged the constitutional validity of these provisions of the law.
The matter would be now heard in due course.
