The Supreme Court has refused to interfere with an order passed by Allahabad High Court putting a blanket ban on lower courts against the grant of bail to former Member of Parliament from Uttar Pradesh Atiq Ahmed who is facing trial in 44 criminal cases.
Ahmed had approached the Court challenging violation of his fundamental right to life and liberty, protected under Article 21 of Constitution. He complained that the February 20, 2017 order by the Allahabad HC was passed at his back without hearing him or making him a party to the case being heard by the Court.
Representing him, a battery of senior lawyers led by Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi and KTS Tulsi told the Court that the HC order must go as it falls foul of the basic principle of natural justice which requires a right of hearing to the person before an order is passed against him. The HC ignored several applications filed by the petitioner to be added as a party to the proceedings going on before the HC, the lawyers argued.
The Bench of Justices Pinaki C Ghose and Rohington F Nariman by its order of March 9 decided to allow Ahmed four weeks to present his side of the argument before the HC by submitting his arguments in writing.
The Court further directed the HC to hear the petitioner’s lawyers before passing an order. However, the Bench found no ground to interfere with the order directing a blanket ban on trial courts from granting Ahmed bail. By earlier orders, the HC even directed the police authorities to take steps for cancellation of bail granted to the history-sheeter politician in cases where he is at large.
Incidentally, the case being heard by the HC resulted out of a criminal case relating to a scuffle between students and teachers that took place in December 2016 where the petitioner was named as one of the accused. About six persons received minor injuries. The HC started monitoring the case and expanded it later by seeking information on the remaining criminal cases against Ahmed, a former MP from Phulpur and a five-time MlA. Due to the present FIR, he lost the Samajwadi Party ticket to contest the recently-concluded UP Assembly elections from Kanpur Cantonment.
Out of the 44 cases against him, in six cases trial has either led to acquittal or chargesheet has been filed. Four out of the remaining 38 were instances of preventive detention while 23 cases involving heinous offences of murder, attempt to murder, and abduction, were lodged naming him while in jail. The petition by Ahmed filed by advocate Shuvodeep Roy claimed that all cases against Ahmed were part of “political witch-hunting” at the behest of Mayawati government in UP since all cases pertain to the period prior to 2010.