08 August,2026 06:19 PM IST | Mumbai | Vinod Kumar Menon
The judge examined the specific allegations and material attributed to each student. Representational Pic/File
Mumbai City Civil and Sessions Court on Friday, August 7, granted anticipatory bail to seven students in a case linked to a programme held at the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) in October 2025. The court rejected the anticipatory bail pleas of two other students.
Additional Sessions Judge V. B. Bohra considered the allegations, the investigation carried out so far, the material placed before the court and the individual role attributed to each student.
The case was initially registered at Trombay Police Station in 2025. It was later transferred to the Mumbai Crime Branch, Unit-6, Chembur.
According to the FIR filed by the Associate Dean of TISS, around 10 to 12 students gathered outside Hostel No. 4 on October 12, 2025, without prior permission.
The FIR alleges that the students lit candles, displayed a photograph of former Delhi University professor G. N. Saibaba, read his poems and wrote the words "Rest in Power (1967-Forever)".
The prosecution also alleged that slogans seeking the release of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam were raised during the gathering.
The allegations were disputed by the students during the bail proceedings.
Saibaba had earlier been convicted under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The Bombay High Court acquitted him in March 2024. He died in October 2024.
Advocate Vijay Hiremath, representing the students, told the court that the applicants had no criminal antecedents and had co-operated with the investigation.
Special Public Prosecutor Shishir Hiray opposed the applications. The prosecution relied on material collected during the investigation, including material allegedly recovered from electronic devices and other material contained in the case papers.
The court examined the allegations and evidence against each applicant separately.
The court rejected the anticipatory bail applications of Abhirup Paul and Kamakhya Prasad Das.
In Paul's case, the prosecution referred to material allegedly found on his laptop, including Maoist literature and deleted material. WhatsApp chats and other material were also cited as requiring further investigation.
The court observed that merely downloading books or literature published by a Maoist organisation would not, by itself, amount to an offence. However, after considering the material in Paul's individual case, the court held that his custodial interrogation was necessary for further investigation and therefore refused him anticipatory bail.
Das's application was also rejected. The prosecution relied on material allegedly recovered from him, allegations relating to slogans and an allegation that he had threatened a police officer. The court found grounds for custodial interrogation in his case.
The court granted anticipatory bail to Nikita Monica Dsouza, Hardika Bhagat, Satyam Yadav, Uttkarsh Khuntia, Yash Kaundilya, Avantika and Ishpreet Kaur.
The judge examined the specific allegations and material attributed to each student.
In some cases, the prosecution alleged participation in the programme or the raising of slogans. In Yadav's case, the prosecution referred to his participation in the event, including reading a poem by Saibaba.
However, the court did not find sufficient grounds in these cases to require custodial interrogation.
While considering the bail applications, the court observed that paying homage to Saibaba, by itself, could not be treated as an illegal act, particularly in view of his acquittal by the Bombay High Court.
The court also considered the prosecution's allegations concerning slogans seeking the release of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam.
It referred to the use of the phrase "Rest in Power (1967-Forever)" instead of "Rest in Peace" while examining the circumstances of the programme. However, the expression was not treated in isolation as sufficient to establish a criminal offence.
The observations were made in the context of the anticipatory bail applications and the material available at the present stage of the investigation.
The seven students granted anticipatory bail were directed to furnish a bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety.
They were also directed to co-operate with the investigation being conducted by the Mumbai Crime Branch, Unit-6, Chembur, and not to interfere with witnesses.
The students were further restricted from travelling abroad without prior permission from the court.
The outcome of the nine anticipatory bail applications was not the same for all the students.
While seven students were granted protection from arrest, the pleas of two students were rejected after the court assessed the allegations and material attributed to them individually.
The orders concern anticipatory bail and do not amount to a final finding on the guilt or innocence of any of the accused. The criminal investigation will continue in accordance with law.
