A Nagpur court on Thursday granted bail to Maharashtra’s former Chief Minister and leader of the Opposition in the State Assembly Devendra Fadnavis in a case seeking criminal proceedings against him non-disclosure of criminal cases registered against him in his 2014 election affidavit.
Fadnavis, who had been granted exemption from personal appearance on four previous occasions, finally appeared before Chief Metropolitan Magistrate PS Ingle amid tight security, and sought bail in the case.
After recording Fadnavis’ appearance before the court, the CJM granted him bail on a personal bond of Rs 15,000.
Fadnavis had been given last chance to appear before the court on Thursday. While granting bail to Fadnavis, the CJM observed: “The presence of the accused (Fadnavis) is secured. The offences are bailable. There is no apprehension of him absconding. Hence, bail is granted”.
The court was hearing an application filed by advocate Satish Uke, seeking criminal proceedings to be initiated against Fadnavis for alleged non-disclosure of criminal cases registered against him in his election affidavit in the 2014 Assembly elections.
The court, while granting bail, directed Fadnavis to remain present at the next hearing and also as and when directed by the court in the matter. The court has scheduled the next hearing for March 30.
Earlier, advocate Satish Uke opposed Fadnavis’ bail application on grounds that he had skipped earlier hearings on various grounds and citing the precedence of a similar case concerning Delhi Chief Minister Arvind
Kejriwal.
Uke had initially had moved a magisterial court which dismissed his complaint against Fadnavis on September 7, 2015. Subsequently, he moved a sessions court in Nagpur which transferred the matter to the magisterial court for a “de novo” (afresh) consideration.
Not happy with the Sessions court’s order, Fadnavis moved the Bombay High Court, which on May 3, 2018 set it aside.
Later, in its judgment on October 1, 2019, the apex court had set aside the Bombay High Court order which gave a clean chit to Fadnavis and held that he did not deserve to be tried for the alleged offence under the Representation of the People (RP) Act.
The SC order had come on an appeal filed by Uke, who had challenged the high court’s order.
In its October 1 2019 order, the Supreme Court had directed that a magistrate’s court in Nagpur district consider afresh the complaint filed by Uke, seeking criminal proceedings to be initiated against Mr Fadnavis under section 125-A of the RP Act.
The section 125-A of the RP Act, which deals with the penalty for “filing false affidavit”, says if a candidate or his proposer fails to furnish or gives false or conceals any information in his nomination paper on issues like pending criminal cases, then the person may be awarded six months jail term or fine or both.
Early this week, the Supreme Court reserved its verdict on Fadnavis’ plea seeking review of its 2019 judgment asking the BJP leader to face trial for allegedly failing to furnish details of two pending criminal cases against him in his 2014 poll affidavit.
While representing Fadnavis, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi had told a SC bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra that the issue would have very far reaching consequences for other candidates fighting elections and the apex court needed to re-examine its October 1, 2019 order.