Introduction
A former student of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) has approached the Bombay High Court seeking anticipatory bail after being accused of raising inflammatory slogans at an unauthorized event. The slogans were allegedly in support of jailed activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, both accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
Case Background
The case, referenced as Kamakhya Das v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., involves allegations that inflammatory slogans were raised during a gathering held to commemorate the first death anniversary of the late Delhi University professor GN Saibaba. The event was reportedly unauthorized and took place near a hostel on the TISS campus.
Sessions Court Ruling
Kamakhya Das, a 24-year-old Development Studies graduate, initially sought anticipatory bail from a Mumbai sessions court. However, his plea was rejected, prompting him to escalate the matter to the Bombay High Court. The sessions court had previously granted anticipatory bail to seven other students involved, noting that the allegations against them were not severe enough to necessitate custodial interrogation.
Allegations and Defense
The First Information Report (FIR) alleges that 10–12 students participated in the event, raising slogans that were deemed inflammatory. Das, however, contends that no such slogans were raised by the students. He argues that the allegations are based on falsehoods and that the charges of unlawful assembly and promoting enmity between groups are unfounded.
Das further asserts that the possession of books published by members of the CPI (Maoist), found on his devices, does not equate to criminal activity. He maintains his innocence and highlights his constitutional right to read literature of any ideology.
More Read
High Court Appeal
In his plea to the High Court, filed through advocates Vijay Hiremath and Rishika Agarwal, Das challenges the sessions court’s decision. He emphasizes that the lack of university permission for the gathering does not transform a peaceful event into an unlawful assembly. Das also disputes the need for custodial interrogation, citing his extensive cooperation with the investigation over several months.
Upcoming Hearing
Justice Prafulla Khubalkar of the Bombay High Court has agreed to hear Das’ plea, with the hearing scheduled for the following day. The outcome of this appeal could significantly impact the legal proceedings against Das and potentially influence interpretations of similar cases involving student activism and freedom of expression.
