NIA Court Rejects Bail Cancellation Plea Against Sudha Bharadwaj, 3 Others In Elgar Parishad Case

NIA Court Rejects Bail Cancellation Plea Against Sudha Bharadwaj, 3 Others In Elgar Parishad Case

A special NIA court has rejected the agency’s plea seeking cancellation of bail granted to activists Sudha Bharadwaj, Varavara Rao, Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira in the Elgar Parishad violence case. The court said mere presence at a gathering with co-accused persons did not amount to violation of bail conditions, while cautioning them to exercise care.

Charul Shah JoshiUpdated: Sunday, August 30, 2026, 08:58 AM IST
NIA Court Rejects Bail Cancellation Plea Against Sudha Bharadwaj, 3 Others In Elgar Parishad Case
NIA Court Rejects Bail Cancellation Plea Against Sudha Bharadwaj, 3 Others In Elgar Parishad Case | Representational Image

Mumbai: The special NIA court has refused to cancel the bail of activists Sudha Bharadwaj, poet Varavara Rao, Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira, who are booked in connection with their alleged involvement in the Elgar Parishad violence case.

The NIA’s special public prosecutor, Prakash Shetty, had sought cancellation of their bail, claiming that the four attended and actively participated in a meeting held on January 19 at the terrace of the Mumbai Press Club.

It was alleged that, while granting them bail, the court had imposed a condition restraining them from making contact or communicating with co-accused persons or anyone else linked to the case.

The court, however, rejected the plea while cautioning the four. It observed:

“Since the accused were well aware of the bail condition imposed, on seeing other accused gathered at the function dated January 19 at the terrace of Mumbai Press Club, to avoid further complications.”

Court cautions activists

“The accused could and should have recused themselves without participating further in the function and avoided the possibility of inviting such an application for cancellation of bail. The accused are expected to take proper care and caution to avoid even the possibility of breaching any of the bail conditions,” it observed.

“The intention behind imposing the specific bail condition has to be taken into account, that is, the accused should not contact or communicate with co-accused to be involved again in similar activities. Without any evidence to that effect, certainly, mere gathering of the accused falls short of concluding that the bail condition is breached,” the court said.

Also Watch:

Court explains bail condition

“Even on the dates of this case in court, the accused meet each other in the courtroom and certainly outside the courtroom. There too, the accused may be talking to each other, having contact and communication with each other. At that time too, the accused may be discussing the facts and fate of the accused and co-accused,” the court said.

“By that, they cannot be said to be committing any breach of that specific bail condition. Hence, merely because the venue of the meeting or gathering of the accused changed, they cannot be said to have committed a breach of the bail condition, as alleged.”

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/